investigate the ways that peer mentorship affectssense of belonging and discipline identity for students from varied matriculation points.IntroductionAs higher education institutions foster increasingly diverse undergraduate populations, it isimperative that student success initiatives purposefully develop students’ sense of belongingwithin an institution, a campus, a peer community, and an academic discipline. Belonging is acritical dimension of student success affecting a student’s degree of academic adjustment,persistence, and post-graduate aspirations, while also contributing to institutional benchmarkslike retention and degree completion [1]. Additionally, the decline in the number of traditional-age college students after 2025, a result of the
Engineering StudentsIntroduction Engineering in the United States is growing stagnant from a lack of change. According toEngineering by the Numbers for the year 2021, many of the top-producing universities forengineers either remained the same from the previous year or, in the case of George Tech (thetop school), graduated fewer students in 2021 than in 2020 [1]. Much of the conversationsurrounding engineering today is much the same as it has been for years. There is not enough“supply,” i.e., engineers, to meet the demand for engineers in today's economy [2],[3]. Manyhave proposed that diversifying engineering can change this narrative and meet the demand forengineers [2],[3]. Much of the literature surrounding engineering
Engineering EducationBackground/MotivationThe research on self-concept has been occupying a significant portion of the studies contributingto the advancement of educational psychology. As much as the topic has gained popularity in thepast decades, it suffered due to the lack of a concrete definition in its early years of advent [1].As interest in it grew, self-concept also gained strength, clarity, and structure. It grew strong as itgained a definition explaining how it might play an important role for a student and for aneducator [1]. Clarity was provided when it was differentiated from some parallel concepts inself-theory and affixing a space for self-concept in an individual’s perceptions, and not a justplaceholder [2]. Structure was added by
performance.A student entering an engineering college in the 1980s may have heard the phrase, “Look to theleft, look to the right, only one of you will become an engineer.” While some of us may haveheard that phrase when entering college, today the aspirational objective should be, “Look to theleft, look to the right, all three of you have the opportunity to graduate as an engineer.”Several factors are creating challenges in meeting this aspirational objective: student preparation,student demographics, and student to college adaptation [1][2][3][4][5].Student preparation is one of the most challenging elements a college can face. Incoming studentpopulation preparation is changing. Over the last 5 years, students that are entering engineeringare less
ESS now pilot the "Cohort internship model" or "Cohort Pipeline to EngineeringWorkforce." Most interns received return offers while working towards associate and bachelor'sdegree completion. Most importantly, students who completed the ESS increased theirbelonging, self-efficacy to the engineering profession, and confidence in their goals.II. INTRODUCTIONRegardless of academic preparation, many students enroll in college without the strong skills andstrategies to navigate higher education effectively [1]. To streamline transitions and bridge theskills gap, first-year experience (FYE) courses, often referred to as college success seminars orfreshman seminars, are designed for first-year students in 2-year and 4-year institutions. First-year
implications of the mini-courseapproach are discussed.Literature ReviewThis paper touches on two themes that have received considerable attention in the literature:redesign of the first-year engineering experience and student success/retention within engineeringmajors. The literature presents various motivations and methodologies for redesigning thefirst-year engineering experience. The goals of a first-year engineering experience are typicallymultifaceted and vary based on context. There is value in helping students understand whatengineering is – exposing them to the breadth of majors available – and what it takes to besuccessful in the rigorous engineering coursework [1, 2]. It is not clear to what extent prospectivestudents come in knowing which
declare their major on the entrance to theirfirst year.I. IntroductionThe experiences accumulated by students during their first year in college have a lastingimpact on the rest of their academic lives [1]. The sense of career and institutional belonging,as well as the self-efficacy beliefs of students, have been identified as crucial factors for theirpersistence and success [2] [3]. We argue that both these factors are affected by the awarenessfirst-year students have about their chosen field of study. This is particularly true forinstitutions admitting students into a specific major since their first college year.An assessment of the reasons reported by first- and second-year students in the host institutionfor choosing an engineering major
solicitation of the College of Engineering in 2020 and a three-yearredesign was undertaken and completed in Fall 2023 with its third iteration.This paper assesses how the redesign achieved the initial goals and how its delivery reflects thedesired characteristics. Four course outcomes were adopted: 1) Develop creative solutions byapplying engineering design, math, science, and data analysis, 2) Construct an effectiveprototype or model using technology and tools, 3) Demonstrate improved power skills(communication, teamwork, information literacy, professionalism), and 4) Employ NSPE Codeof Ethics to examine case studies and extrapolate for other situations. In terms of the courseoutcomes, this paper describes how students self-assessed their achievement
Department of Computer Science within the School of Engineering at Tufts University. Having received his graduate degrees in Computer Science and Electrical Engineering from Tufts University, he continues research in the design, implementation, and evaluation of different educational technologies. With particular attention to engaging students in the STEAM content areas, he focuses his investigations on enhancing creativity and innovation, supporting better documentation, and encouraging collaborative learning. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 1 Catalyzing Sociotechnical Thinking
year, but that further study is needed to maintain and improve students’ perception ofengineering identity between the first and second years.IntroductionEngineering identity, a person’s level of belief that they are an engineer, has been studiedextensively as it is has shown to be linked to retention in the engineering profession [1], [2].Various theories have been applied to describe and define identity in an engineering contextincluding multiple identity theory, sociocultural theory, social identity theory, and identity stagetheory [3], [4]. Utilizing these theories, many studies have sought to quantify identity inengineering [5]–[8]. Herein, we define engineering identity as students’ self-assessment of theirinterest, performance/ability
the data collection informedcritical design decisions at the end of the paper.IntroductionThe transition from high school to university involves significant adjustments, including theacculturation to a new academic environment, sometimes even a change in the language ofinstruction, and social expectations and norms. This transition period is known to define thecritical decisions students may make in subsequent years. Findings from a study led by Katanis[1] found that the expectations students set for their first-year experiences were either partiallyor not met. Students encountered a much heavier workload than expected, in addition to findinguniversity studies uninteresting. In terms of academic progress, more than half of therespondents were
student employees aiding in daily operation [1]–[3]. Thereare naturally ongoing conversations about best practices at academic conferences, and this papercontributes an additional set of practices, as well as a novel assessment of student employeeexperiences.At Virginia Tech, well over 2000 students each year complete a two-semester generalengineering program before selecting a specific discipline. The second semester generalengineering course is dedicated to a hands-on design project. This project is supported by anacademic makerspace accessible only to first-year engineering students. The makerspace has alsohistorically provided students opportunities to pursue personal projects, and supported smallerprojects run by some faculty as part of the
have observed that incoming first-yearstudents often struggle with teamwork, and several instructors from the program attended aworkshop in Summer 2022 led by Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI) with lengthy experienceleading project-based learning first-year engineering courses. The facilitators of this workshopprovided activities that can be integrated into existing or new courses to help foster equitableteaming practices in a project based learning setting. These tools had previously beenimplemented in a program at WPI and are available in Pfeifer and Stoddard, 2020 [1]; this paperexplores implementations and impact of integrating these equitable teaming tools at a largerscale.The instructors of the first-year engineering course who
Paper ID #38922Impact of Inclusion of Makerspace and Project Types on Student Comfortwith Additive Manufacturing and Three-Dimensional Modeling in First-YearEngineering ProgramDr. Andrew Charles Bartolini, University of Notre Dame Assistant Teaching Professor, University of Notre Dame Coordinator, First-Year Engineering Program, University of Notre DameSimran Moolchandaney, University of Notre Dame Simran Moolchandaney is a class of 2023 undergraduate student at the University of Notre Dame major- ing in Computer Science and minoring in Bioengineering. Outside the classroom, Simran is an NCAA Division 1 Fencer, and an active
scholarship program. The project builds on prior research suggesting thataffective factors including sense of belonging, identity, and self-efficacy play important yet notfully understood roles in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) students’academic persistence and successful progression toward careers, and that these factors can proveparticularly influential for individuals from groups that have been historically marginalized inSTEM [1]-[6]. Prior studies conducted as part of this research project have demonstrated impactsof Scholars’ math-related experiences on their developing identities [7] and found that structuresassociated with the scholarship program helped support Scholars’ developing sense of belongingdespite the shift
other Universities. Among the main considerations were pro-school models, if college-wide first year programs existed, length of those programs, anyadditional requirements for common courses such as math, physics, and social sciences, graderequirements, and major selection timeline. Many Universities have published educationalresearch on their programs, such as Arizona State University [1], [2], Texas A&M [3], andVirginia Tech [4], [5], and the Taskforce synthesized this literature into a set ofrecommendations for the new program. The Taskforce’s recommendations were similar incontent to the conclusions of ABET’s 2017 report titled “Engineering Change: Lessons fromLeaders on Modernizing Higher Education Engineering Curriculum” [6]. This
, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education focuses oneducating future generations to be successful in their professions. A decline in STEMproficiency has been reported in America, leading to significant regression from its position asa global leader in math and science. Debbie Myers, general manager of DiscoveryCommunications in STEM Diversity Symposium concluded: "International comparisons placethe U.S. in the middle of the pack globally." For the United States to achieve a competitiveadvantage, there is a need to encourage young people to develop a passion for learning andspecifically encourage minorities and females to pursue STEM careers [1]. Another report named "Rising above the Gathering Storm" indicated that the U.S. is
to graduating seniors, alumni of the program, and writing assessments.IntroductionThere is a long history of collaboration between mathematics and engineering departments, asdemonstrated through engineering-specific sections of mathematics courses [1], but collaborationbetween English and engineering departments is less common (although see [2]–[4]). Similarly,collaborative efforts to incorporate writing and information literacy into the teaching of thenatural sciences (e.g., biology and chemistry) appear to be more common than in engineeringcurricula [5]–[8]. Because writing is an essential skill for professional engineers, introducing andpracticing engineering writing skills early in a student’s academic career is an opportunity toincrease
. Resultant implications,limitations, and revelations of these findings conclude this paper.1. The Formal Makerspace Course1.1 Course OverviewDuring the first-year at the J. B. Speed School of Engineering at the University of Louisville(UofL), all engineering students are required to take a course titled Engineering Methods, Tools,and Practice II (ENGR 111) [1-7]. The ultimate goal of ENGR 111 is to instruct students inapplication and integration of institutionally-identified fundamental engineering skills that areintroduced and practiced in the prerequisite Engineering Methods, Tools, and Practice I (ENGR110) course. Other notable general features of ENGR 111 include a formal (15,000 ft2) makerspacesetting that exclusively employs active learning
plays a key role in addressing global inequity and injustice.Enabling engineers to address complex technological challenges like climate change requires thedevelopment of new skills such as evaluating justice dimensions of engineering andcollaborating with diverse communities [1].Conventional engineering education emphasizes technology-based attributes such as analyticalskill development, technical knowledge, and creative problem solving and leaves little time forstudents to deeply engage with the social implications of their work [2] [3]. However, in recentyears, there has been an increased effort to incorporate social justice into engineering education[4-9]. One method has been to encourage students to take social justice-based electives
students at the Algebra II placement level. Together, this means that students takingENGR 2100 are not making as much progress towards their degree as other students in thecollege during their first semester and that students who might benefit from some of the topics inENGR 2100 don’t have access because they placed into a higher level of math.Starting in Fall 2022, ENGR 2100 was revised to satisfy the requirements of a Personal Wellnesscourse within the WMU Essential Studies Program, a rethinking of WMU’s general educationprogram. The approach of integrating wellness into first-year coursework has been discussed byother researchers (e.g., [1]). Eight student learning outcomes were identified for the course(bolded and italic indicates
off-track) are clustered within 25engineering classes (n=12 on-track, n=13 off-track). The results indicate that: (1) studentbiological sex and outcome expectations are statistically significant predictors of persistenceintentions amongst engineering undergraduates—specifically, students who identify as malehave higher intentions to persist than those who identify as female, and (2) these effects do notdiffer between on-track or off-track students. Additionally, (3) the moderation effect ofbiological sex on self-efficacy is not statistically significant when predicting student engineeringidentity—indicating that neither male nor female students perceive their engineering identity andself-efficacy differently. Finally, the effect of self
currently serving as the chair for the Washington Council on Engineering and Related Technical Education (WCERTE).Anna Fay BookerTran M. PhungMei P. LuuSeth Greendale ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2023 WIP: Development of an Integrated Place-Based Learning Community for First-Year Precalculus Level Engineering StudentsIntroductionStudents from historically marginalized backgrounds – especially low-income students, studentsof color, and/or first generation in college – disproportionately place below Calculus level mathand are often underprepared for direct entrance to an engineering baccalaureate degreecurriculum [1] [2]. This equity gap may have been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic
. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2023 Work in Progress: Efficacy of a Peer Mentoring Program for Underrepresented First-Year Students at a Predominantly White InstitutionIntroductionThe structure of higher education in the United States often favors the norms and values ofmajority populations, as well as those with family members who have previously navigated thepostsecondary system [1]. Moreover, the field of engineering represents a discipline in whichpolicies and practices that privilege White men are particularly entrenched [2]. For this and othersocially-constructed reasons, engineering programs tend to retain and graduate Black, Hispanic,and Native American students at disproportionately lower rates than their White peers [3
Engineering Grand Challenge (NAE) or United Nations(UN) Sustainable Communities Goal. Through this process, the student teams develop aprototype to address a problem associated with an NAE or UN global challenge.20, 21 The teamsengage in societally relevant engineering design and problem solving processes in a makerspaceenvironment and complete a four component team project consisting of: (1) a multimedia projectpitch, (2) a scientific project report, (3) a team presentation, and (4) a physical prototype toaddress their selected challenge using design and problem solving principles and frameworksthrough their work within the makerspace. Figure 1 illustrates the process and its components.Student sampleThe students included in this engineering
these areas, creating a challenging environment particularly forunderrepresented engineering students. To combat this issue, a video and activities weredeveloped to emphasize teamwork and inclusion. The video was created by two students whohad taken the course in the previous year. It presented background information, mindful teachingabout inclusion, some discussion of the students’ personal experiences in the course, and anintroduction to the activities. The three activities that were developed were (1) a communicationgame, which allowed students to practice clear and respectful communication, (2) a teamworkand collaboration game, which aimed to show that each member of a team had somethingvaluable to contribute, and (3) a reflection and
developing future educators; students who have completedthe program can serve as undergraduate course assistants (UCAs) where they help studentsduring their first-year engineering classes and have opportunities to develop and teachworkshops on additional engineering topics. From an overall perspective, the first-year programappears to be successful at achieving its goals; however, a more detailed analysis of thedemographics in the program could elucidate areas in need of improvement.Strength tests are commonly used by companies for team and personal development purposes.One such test is the High5 Test, which combined theoretical and empirical approaches into onetest to ensure both conceptual validity and real-world applicability [1]. It outputs five
research.IntroductionThe National Academy of Engineering (NAE) and engineering educators envision a bettertomorrow by preparing undergraduate STEM students to define and build a sustainable, secure,healthy and enjoyable future [1-3]. The NAE fourteen grand challenges encompass the greatestchallenges and opportunities that engineers face and will continue to face in the 21st Century.This work describes the design, implementation and assessment of a summer undergraduateresearch experience curriculum that was established in 2022 to strengthen an existingengineering Grand Challenges Scholars Program (GCSP) in a southeastern Research-One LandGrant institution. The goal of this 10-week summer Research Experience for Undergraduates(REU) program was to provide hands-on
been developed to improve engineering design skills of firstyear students like design thinking exercises, the Engineering Design Canvas, and strategies forcommunicating ideas. The evidence-based practice described in this study consists of in-classexercises for each of these tools which include 1) an IDEO design thinking worksheet at thebeginning of the project, 2) the Engineering Design Canvas at the middle of the project, and 3)the Heitmeier Catechism design communication strategies at the end of the project.This study was conducted at New York University in the first-year multidisciplinary introductoryengineering course General Engineering 1004 Introduction to Engineering and Design. Eachsemester, half of the 700 first-year students enroll
, especially as they navigate across and within different modalities,sometimes simultaneously. Therefore, to be able to design and facilitate effective HyFlexenvironments, educators must understand the relationship between students' self-regulation andtheir choice of daily participation across modality. In this research, by comparing students’ self-regulation skills and attendance patterns, we examined the relationship between participationchoices and self-regulation in a HyFlex environment. 1 Literature Review HyFlex HyFlex, short for hybrid-flexible, is an