professor of engineering and a professor ofcommunication, working in tandem to provide comprehensive, industry-reflective designexperience to students over the course of a year. In the course students work in teams to deliverprogress reports and presentations on a design they formulate and build at facilities available oncampus. Their progress presentations and reports are modeled after those seen in industry.In Fall of 2021 two of this paper’s authors sought to mirror this paired instruction in the students’first year. They created a “cornerstone” course by combining an early curriculum CAD designcourse, EGR 201, with a technical writing course, COM 221 [1]. The two courses werescheduled back to back on MWF, which created a 2 hour and 40-minute
the new curriculum on student understanding of social justice and students’ perceptionof the relevance of social justice to the profession. Student evaluations and written reflectionswere also examined to gauge how students perceived the integration of social justice into anintroductory engineering course. Survey results indicate that student awareness of the relevanceof social justice to the engineering profession increased over the course of the quarter. Inaddition, findings indicate an increase in understanding of social justice concepts along with anincrease in ability to identify social injustice. As seen through course evaluations and writtenreflections, student response to the course has been positive and most students are receptive
integral component of the first-year engineering course, with participation inthese sessions contributing to the students' final course grades.Expanding the Peer Mentoring Program to include transfer students necessitates greaterflexibility compared to students following the traditional FEP curriculum. Given that the transferclass operates as an asynchronous remote course, adjustments were made to the Transfer PeerMentoring Program to accommodate both remote and in-person meetings. Existing mentorsvolunteered to also serve the transfer student population and were matched with mentees basedon declared major and meeting preference (i.e., in-person vs. virtual). Instead of providingpredetermined topics, mentors adopted a more personalized approach
Engineering Ethics for First Year Engineering StudentsThis Work-in-Progress paper stems from an NSF-sponsored project in which a series of game-based activities have been developed for the purpose of enhancing instruction in engineeringethics. These activities have been integrated into first year engineering courses on severalcampuses. One of these activities is called Toxic Workplaces. In gameplay, the students arepresented with scenarios that involve ethical dilemmas. Each scenario comes with severalpossible responses. The game involves the student/player attempting to rank these possibleresponses in order of popularity. Thus, players do not necessarily need to take a position on whatthey themselves would do, but rather are attempting to match the
andacademic development workshops into the curriculum of an introductory engineering class. Inaddition, this paper discusses the importance of a peer-to-peer mentorship program, specificallyfocusing on utilizing the course teaching assistants (TAs) as role models and mentors. Thestudents’ demographic data, the development workshop topics and content, and the impact andoverall effectiveness of the interventions implemented in this study are discussed. The researchproject explores the implications of future iterations that integrate the lessons learned from thisanalysis and propose the next steps to ensure a replicable positive impact on the students.MethodologyOverview of Introductory Engineering CourseAt the University of Texas at El Paso, first year
ManufacturingEngineering Technology Program," Proceedings of the 2002 American Society for EngineeringEducation Annual Conference and Exposition, pp. 7.824.1-9, 2002.[4] D. Crevier, "Educational Experiments in Machine Vision," IEEE Transactions onEducation, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 90-92, 1996.[5] G. Morison, M. D. Jenkins, T. Buggy and P. Barrie, "An Implementation FocusedApproach to Teaching Image Processing and Machine Vision - From Theory to Beagleboard,"Proceedings of the 6th European Embedded Design and Research, pp. 274-277, 2014.[6] R. N. Savage, K. C. Chen and L. Vanasupa, "Integrating Project-based Learningthroughout the Undergraduate Engineering Curriculum," Journal of STEM Education, vol. 8, no.3, pp. 15-27, 2007.[7] C. Jiang, Y. Wan, Y. Zhu
the habitat. Finally, the smaller groups integrated theircomponents and collaborated to maximize the energy efficiency and performance of the Solar-powered Habitat.The assessments of this project were designed for each level of teamwork: 1) Studentshighlighted their contributions through an Engineering Portfolio. 2) Smaller groups reflected ontheir design and building process by submitting weekly engineering logs and a semester-endposter. Finally, 3) Each group habitat (comprising 5~6 groups) presented its energy-efficienthabitat design in the first-year design expo at the end of the semester. The ongoing datacollection of this effort on project-based, multidisciplinary, multilevel teamwork proved how thisproject design effectively cultivated
motivation: Connections between first‐yearstudents' engineering role identities and future‐time perspectives," J Eng Educ, vol. 109, (3), pp.362-383, 2020.[13] D. Rae and D. E. Melton, "Developing an entrepreneurial mindset in US engineeringeducation: an international view of the KEEN project," The Journal of EngineeringEntrepreneurship, vol. 7, (3), 2017.[14] J. Blake Hylton et al, "Working to instill the entrepreneurial mindset across the curriculum,"Entrepreneurship Education and Pedagogy, vol. 3, (1), pp. 86-106, 2020.[15] R. S. Harichandran et al, "Developing an Entrepreneurial Mindset in Engineering StudentsUsing Integrated E-Learning Modules." Advances in Engineering Education, vol. 7, (1), pp. n1,2018.[16] D. R. Riley et al, "First-year
Hira, Boston College Dr. Avneet Hira is an Assistant Professor in the Human-Centered Engineering Program and the Department of Teaching, Curriculum and Society (by courtesy) at Boston College.Siddhartan Govindasamy, Boston College Siddhartan Govindasamy is a Professor of Engineering at Boston College, where he is a founding faculty member of the program in Human-Centered Engineering. Prior to Boston College, he was an Assistant and then Associate Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering at Olin College of Engineering, where he was part of the team of faculty who redesigned the introductory mathematics, physics and engineering course sequence to become more integrated. ©American
some of the desired changesto the schedule and curriculum lagged, such as the integration of multiple disciplines into thiscommon first-year plan, they did introduce methods of grouping students together to allow themto familiarize themselves with their peers and build relationships [3]. An example is the conceptof block scheduling, where students would register for defined set of classes, meaning theywould consistently be surrounded by their peers taking the same courses. While they did alsoprovide non-blocked schedule options for non-traditional students, the focus on building peer-to-peer relationships was more heavily emphasized on the block-scheduled courses [3]. Studentscould be introduced to topics in a more comfortable and familiar
explanations about how it canbe adapted to self-referent domains of an individual is discussed. The distinctions between theterms posed in this study are then used to identify which sub-constructs are most pertinent formeasuring self-concept in engineering education.Identifying the variables (sub-constructs) within self-concept has beneficial applications in first-year engineering education due to the noted levels of attrition in the first two years of anengineering curriculum [6]. Building a scale and consequent interventions to influence those sub-constructs will help improve student retention due to the direct relation of self-concept withacademic achievement; less importantly in terms of high grades but more so as an activecontributor to human
it’s viewed as being integral tothe success of the course, in that an assignment must be accessible, engaging, challenging onlywith respect to the material it is intended to teach, and be worthy of the time and effort invested[3]. Additionally, a 2001 study on factors contributing to the success of students in introductorycomputer science courses concluded that the best predictor of success was the students’ comfortlevel and recommended that instructors should provide a welcoming environment [4]. A 2017literature review on students’ misconceptions in introductory programming provides an additionalperspective: that an ability to apply effective instructional approaches and tools in addressingstudents’ difficulties is vital to successfully
, Lecturer at the Department of Engineering Education at The Ohio State University, and Assistant Professor at the Department of Integrated Engineering at Minnesota State University, Mankato. She holds a Ph.D. in Engineering Education from Virginia Tech. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024WIP: Implementing a community engagement project in a first-yearfoundations of engineering courseIntroductionThis paper seeks to explore the benefits and challenges of incorporating community engagementprojects into an existing first-year engineering course. Instructors have noted over the years thatstudents in engineering courses often find it difficult to relate to non-technical issues, especiallymaterial
their counterparts [36]. Efforts haveincluded updating the first year curriculum to incorporate social justice [37], integratinginclusive practices into the departmental makerspace [38] [15], creating a summer bridgeprogram for engineering students [39], conducting research on impacts of curricular and co-curricular changes on belonging and identity [40] [41] [42], and an National Science Foundation(NSF)-funded project which seeks to increase student sense of belonging in undergraduateengineering students through the integration of social engagement activities into an academicmakerspace.The focus of this paper is related to an NSF-funded makerspace engagement and belongingproject. There are two main components of the project: 1. Development and
startingpoint, we have conducted a series of in-depth interviews with UMAs to explore their individualexperiences, the mentorship phenomenon, and makerspace community formation.References[1] M. Cooke et al., “Models for curricular integration of higher education makerspaces,” in Proc. of the Int. Symp. on Academic Makerspaces, 2018, 22 pp. 1-12.[2] J. E. McMordie, M. D. Kohn, D. W. Beach, and J. C. Milroy, “Coaches and Their Impact: One Model for Empowering Teaching Assistants in an Academic Makerspace,” in Proc. of the Int. Symp. on Academic Makerspaces, 2016, pp. 118-122.[3] D. Roberts and J. Buckley, “Case Study: Maker Space Management by Minions,” Adv. Eng. Educ., 2020, Accessed: Sep. 27, 2021. [Online]. Available
Paper ID #37973Use of Transfer Student Capital in Engineering and STEM Education: ASystematic Literature ReviewDr. Kristin Kelly Frady, Clemson University Kristin Frady is an Assistant Professor at Clemson University jointly appointed between the Educational and Organizational Leadership Development and Engineering and Science Education Departments. Her research focuses on innovations in workforce development at educational and career transitions. The context of her research emphasizes three primary areas, specifically focusing on two-year college and secondary STEM and career education, educational innovations, and the
inengineering [2] [4] [5]. Critical thinking involves identifying, analyzing, and testing informationat a high cognitive level [5]. Developing the art of critical thinking in students is a persistenteffort in an engineering curriculum. Students are encouraged to exercise this by identifying theproblem, making accurate and reliable judgments, and implementing logical and dependablesolutions to real-world problems. Issa et al. studied a significant difference in student learningbetween conventional and project-based learning strategies [5]. Students understand the needs of their community through PBSL. Studies as early as1994 by Batchelder et al. demonstrated that PBSL positively affects students’ psychological,social, and cognitive development
tacklethe “messiness” of open-ended design problems.[1] Particularly in large first-year courses,implementing and assessing these open-ended design problems is difficult due to resource(space, staffing, time, financial, etc.) constraints. Finding an appropriate balance betweenconcrete and open-ended design projects is critical to maximizing students’ learning.ENGGEN 115: Principles of Engineering Design is a required first-year course in the Faculty ofEngineering at the University of Auckland. The course was re-designed in 2022 to emphasizedesign process over technical engineering, promote creative problem solving, and to test aconcrete/open-ended balance that might work for the combination of curriculum, student cohort,and faculty arrangement in
Paper ID #41539Neurodivergent and Neurotypical Students in a First-Year Engineering DesignCourse: Identity, Self-Efficacy, and ExperiencesDr. Angela R. Bielefeldt, University of Colorado Boulder Angela Bielefeldt is a professor at the University of Colorado Boulder in the Department of Civil, Environmental, and Architectural Engineering (CEAE) and the Director for the Integrated Design Engineering (IDE) program. The IDE program houses both an undergraduate IDE degree accredited under the ABET EAC General criteria and a new PhD degree in Engineering Education. Dr. Bielefeldt conducts research on engineering ethics
to increasethe participation of students from diverse backgrounds in engineering majors. Additionally, theAccreditation Board of Engineering and Technology recently made a commitment to diversityand is considering changes to curriculum criteria which would require engineering programs todemonstrate a culture of diversity, equity, and inclusion [1]. In alignment with USAFA’sstrategic plan and the anticipated accreditation criteria, the authors are developing a newfoundational engineering course as one element of an institution-wide effort to improve students’sense of belonging, make engineering majors more accessible to a wider audience, andultimately increase diversity among engineering graduates.In addition to exploring best practices from
Paper ID #37282Assessing Various Pedagogical Features of Remote Versus In-PersonIterations of a First-Year Engineering, Makerspace CourseDr. Brian Scott Robinson, University of Louisville Brian Robinson is an Associate Professor with the Department of Engineering Fundamentals at the Uni- versity of Louisville. His primary research focus is in Engineering Education, with highest interest in first-year (and beyond) engineering retention & the effects of value-expectancy theory on student persis- tence.Dr. Thomas Tretter, University of Louisville Thomas Tretter is professor of science education and director of the Gheens
. [9] had similar findings inaddition to finding that many instructors stated if the instructors thought the extra-creditassignments were useful for students then they should simply be required.With these perspectives considered, it is clear that many instructors have concerns regarding howextra credit assignments should be integrated into a curriculum, if at all. Zare [10] suggests thatsome of these concerns can be mitigated by making the work commensurate with the extra points,clearly communicating the special nature of those assignments, and setting clear limits on howmuch will be offered in the syllabus. Similarly, Burke [11] implemented a semester-longextra-credit assignment to mitigate his concerns that extra credit would be used as an
Paper ID #39200Work in Progress: Efficacy of a Peer Mentoring Program forUnderrepresented First-Year Students at a Predominantly White InstitutionDr. Kelyn Rola, Southern Methodist University Dr. Kelyn Rola is a Research Professor in the Caruth Institute for Engineering Education in the Lyle School of Engineering at Southern Methodist University. She is Director of the Thrive Scholars Program in the Lyle School, which supports historically underrepresented students in engineering and computer science during their transition to college. She received her Doctorate in Education Policy and Leadership at SMU with an emphasis
an engineering identity early in theirmatriculation can be significant drivers of attrition from technical fields. Previous researchsuggests that project-based learning builds students’ engineering/computing identity by piquingand developing student interest in engineering topics. Literature on the sense of belonging inengineering suggests that experiencing camaraderie within course-based teams, and particularlyhaving a clear purpose or role within the team, can promote that sense of belonging. The currentresearch project sought to implement evidence-based practices to enhance first-year students’identity and sense of belonging in engineering and computing, in the context of a two-semesterintroductory course sequence that integrates students
] integrated the used of the ESEMAinto a first-year civil engineering curriculum. Their study demonstrates notable improvements inentrepreneurial attitudes among students, particularly in ideation and help-seeking behaviors, asrevealed by the ESEMA survey.Table 1—Engineering Student Entrepreneurial Mindset Assessment Items [1] Factor 1: Ideation (Id) 1. I like to reimagine existing ideas 2. I like to think about ways to improve accepted solutions 3. I typically develop new ideas by improving existing solutions 4. I like to think of wild and crazy ideas 5. I tend to challenge things that are done by the book 6. Other people tell me I am good at thinking outside the box 7. I prefer to challenge adopted solutions rather
emphasis on Higher Education. Dr. Rola’s professional efforts focus on promoting equity, inclusion, and student success in higher education. Her research projects center on supporting traditionally underrepresented students in engineering, social justice education in predominantly White contexts, student well-being and thriving, gender inequities in STEM fields, and navigating the hidden curriculum as a first-generation student.Dr. Caitlin M. Anderson, Southern Methodist University Dr. Caitlin Anderson is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Applied Physiology and Sport Management at Southern Methodist University. She is the Director of the Hilltop Scholars Program at SMU, an honors community for first-year college
career, which despite being complicated, has itspositive side.” Other students mentioned, “In first semesters the subjects are really boring andhaving a course like this motivates me to discover everything that the major can offer” and “Wehave an idea of what we are going to do for the rest of our lives and, at least for me, I loved it.”DiscussionAccording to the American Society for Engineering Education, the main reasons why studentsdrop out are deficient advising and teaching; complicated engineering curriculum and a lack of“belonging” within engineering [14], [16]–[18], [23]. Introducing a first-year hands-on civilengineering course aims to reduce dropout rates at the undergraduate program. Many studentsstated that the course helped them
supportiveacademic environment in the first year, suggesting that targeted feedback and increased tutorcontact could significantly enhance the student transition experience [27].These examples underscore the importance of the constructs to student engagement and success.Together, these constructs offer a comprehensive view of the multifaceted nature of studentengagement, encompassing related elements critical for student engagement and success inengineering education.Site and ParticipantsThis study was conducted within the context of the Engineering+ program at Oregon StateUniversity, an innovative first-year engineering curriculum designed to engage students in hands-on projects, major exploration, and skill development. The Engineering+ program aims
differencesin student’s comfort with the overall concept of modeling in three dimensions and their ability touse specific SolidWorks tools and/or features.ConclusionsThis paper outlined a study focused on student comfort related to additive manufacturing andthree-dimensional modeling through the fall semester of a first-year engineering course at amedium-sized midwestern university. The first-year engineering course, which focused on theengineering design process, integrated a brand-new makerspace into the curriculum through botha multiple iteration group project and an individual project. Students stated their comfort levelwith the aforementioned topics through three surveys. The first survey was at the start of theacademic year, the second survey was
backgrounds to successfully transfer to and persist in theengineering program at UCI. The designed program targets the population of students who havethe ambition to pursue engineering degrees, but often lack the resources or exposure toengineering opportunities. The program was developed to help combat low persistence rates andlong times to completion within the transfer student population. The goal of the project is toincrease the number of community college students who successfully transfer to an engineeringmajor at a 4-year institution and to improve the transfer student experience in engineering byproviding co-curriculum cohort activities to prepare for STEM careers or graduate studies. Co-curricular activities include a mentoring program as