. After the regional campuses revise their curriculum, there has to be maintenance support for these labs. With the delay in shipping and handling, it is not convenient to order broken parts, sensors, or development boards during the course of a semester. Therefore, there have to be extra kits available for backup which requires planning for the budget accordingly. There are maker spaces available on the central campus where students can work on their open-ended projects. For the second semester course (Fundamentals of Engineering II), the project requires brainstorming and conceptualization of the design and creation of the prototypes. Students need to master these skills, however, there are no
4.21 0.99 -1.48 2.10 22 I do not intend to drop out from my engineering degree 4.14 0.99 -1.43 2.05 23 I do not see any reasons to withdraw from pursuing an 3.95 1.04 -0.93 0.33 engineering degree 24 I plan to be still enrolled in the engineering college 4.30 0.90 -1.56 2.77 Expectancies of success 4.16 25 I can meet the goals set for me in the engineering program 4.19 0.66 -0.51 0.51 26 I can satisfy the objectives of the engineering program 4.20 0.68 -0.79 1.83 27 I can successfully earn credits for the engineering courses 4.24 0.73 -1.29 3.34 28 I can pass all the
seminars or experiences are considered one of the high-impact practices (HIPS) [2], and aredesigned to increase first-year retention. The general goals of first-year experience courses are tosupport college students' academic performance, social development, persistence, and degreecompletion. The College Success courses often introduce first-year students to campus resources,time management, study skills, career planning, cultural diversity, and student developmentissues [1]. The majority of 4-year institutions require first-year courses for credit [4]. However,due to the diversity of FYE design and configuration, research shows mixed results regardingpositive outcomes [3]. Zerr and Bjerke [5] compared a three-credit academic-themed first
times during the term: Goal Setting, Student Involvement Fair, Mid-terms, End of Semester 2. Faculty Interview: each student selects a faculty member in area of interest to interview and present to the class 3. Advising Portfolio: review core curriculum and create a list of potential courses for the next term 4. Career Exploration and Alumni Field of Interest Interview: complete a career/interests inventory and conduct a group interview with an alumni who works in a field of potential interest 5. My Improvement/Implementation Plan: review and reflect on the first semester, explore two possible majors and two possible career area of interests and lay out future plan for improvement and explorationWith
Percentage To get advice in career planning 15.5% To polish up my résumé 12.3% How to network with professionals from industry 11.5% To gain knowledge of opportunities related to my career interest 10.7% To know more about the profession related to my major 10.4% To improve my interviewing skills 10.4% To learn about work expectations in industry 10.1% To get general guidance and tips
nights and design challenges, were woven throughoutthe PMP’s programming to foster students’ social support and associated sense of belonging[19]. To encourage faculty relationships, the program hosted mixers that featured opportunitiesfor students to meet and engage with engineering faculty outside of the classroom [27]. The PMPoffered at least one event or seminar each week throughout the academic year, all of whichfeatured content designed to support students’ transition to college. While widely-recognizedpractical skills, such as time management, degree planning, financial literacy, and professionaldevelopment, were included in the programming schedule, the PMP also featured a strongemphasis on student thriving [28]. Specifically, a portion
Engineering Science at Trinity University in San Antonio, Texas.Alyndra Mary Plagge, Trinity University Alyndra Plagge is an undergraduate Psychology student at Trinity University. She is majoring in Psychology and minoring in Education and set to graduate in May 2025. After graduation she plans to pursue her master’s degree.Shea E. Lape ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 Building an Identity in the MakerspaceAbstractThe purpose of this complete research paper is to analyze the impacts of an open makerspace onthe development of students’ engineering identities. This paper seeks to build upon currentbelonging analyses about makerspaces and shift the focus towards
they encounter. Once these processesare articulated, engineers must proceed to engaging in creating the potential solutions for of theproblems that they encounter. Through this, engineers generate potential solutions to theproblem, select an optimal solution, and design and engage in a step-by step-plan(s) andassociated analysis using engineering disciplinary skills. They verify results, evaluate, and adjustthe solutions they work on accordingly, until they reach an optimal solution for their identifiedproblems.10 This is an important process for practicing engineers, however, rarely are first yearengineering students exposed to and able to practice this process. Our program addresses thisimportant practice during the first semester that
goal of this study is to quantify how much the use ofuncommon language affects the performance of students from diverse backgrounds. To quantifythis effect, we created SAT level math questions written with and without uncommonterminology. The questions were then distributed to volunteers as anonymous surveys. Weconducted this research with volunteers from Introduction to Civil Engineering and Introductionto Mechanical Engineering courses. Below in the following section we will detail themethodology of the research, the results of the study, the conclusion, and the planned futurework.MethodologyThe study was approved by Minnesota State University’s Institutional Review Board (IRB)before the study was conducted.The data presented in this paper
a predictor for studentsuccess and that students lacking conscientiousness might be better served by having shorterdeadlines. Conversely, longer deadlines can give students more time to plan, research, and writetheir assignments, which can lead to higher quality work and increased student understanding.Peterson and Digman [6] explored rigid assignment deadlines (RAD) versus a semi self-paced(SSP) course design in a flipped classroom environment. While there were no differences intraditional learner outcomes (e.g., homework and exam scores, course grades), students in theSSP design were granted too much flexibility in their deadlines. SSP students only had twodeadlines throughout the semester before each of the two examinations which led to
- pointLikert response scale for all questions, ensuring there was a middle option to reducemeasurement error. Questions were also asked about future research plans so that researchpersistence intentions could be correlated to the variables in our research question.All responses were converted to a coded value based upon response, as shown in Table 2. Inaddition to the questions, we requested demographic data (year in degree program, firstgeneration status, gender identity, racial/ ethnic identity) which will help to group the responsesduring the analysis.Table 2: Coded values for potential survey responses, based upon a 5- point response scale.Value Potential Survey Responses5 Very Certain Very
& Rauch Plan- etarium at the University of Louisville. His scholarship includes collaborative efforts with science and engineering faculty targeting retention of STEM majors in entry-level STEM courses.Dr. James E. Lewis, University of Louisville James E. Lewis, Ph.D. is an Associate Professor in the Department of Engineering Fundamentals in the J. B. Speed School of Engineering at the University of Louisville. is research interests include paral- lel and distributed computer systems, cryptography, engineering education, undergraduate retention and technology used in the classroom.Mr. Nicholas Hawkins, University of Louisville Nick Hawkins is an Assistant Professor in the Engineering Fundamentals Department at
independently.This change can be problematic for mini-courses that are outside of a student’s area of interest:EE’s taking Engineering Graphics or ME’s taking Applied Programming. When combined into asingle course in the old sequence, there was significant faculty effort and collaboration tointegrate the different skills presented, but now that the topics are separated, instruction istrending toward more traditional siloed approaches.Future WorkThe data analysis for this paper has raised several additional questions that the authors plan toaddress in the future. Data will continue to be collected longitudinally to control for pandemicrelated effects. An investigation is needed to increase understanding of low success rates forstudents who start in
with these please!! I plan on making my own for future classes.”Figure 2. Example ENG1101 Student Learning and Emotional Journey through Unit 2Figure 3. Example ENG1101 Student Learning and Emotional Journey through Unit 3Figure 4. Example ENG1101 Student Learning and Emotional Journey through Unit 4There is a lot of data to unpack in these learning journeys, but our analysis in this WIP paper willprimarily focus on the Unit 2 learning journeys. When we started this unit in Fall 2021, oneinstructor noticed that after session 8 (S08), the students appeared to be overwhelmed and apractice day (S09) was added to the unit. This journey map reflection was implemented after thestudents completed the exam (Unit 2 demo) to see how the students
needs and industry trends.ConclusionDuring this process, we observed a problem in a third-year course led to investigating the depthand breadth of the problem. Data and evidence were collected and sources and needs wereidentified. Possible solutions with pros and cons were suggested and evaluated. faculty input wassolicited to validate the solutions. We planned accordingly and implemented the solutions e.g.new course was added and topics and RBs were reorganized. The new course was offered in Fall2023 for the first time, and its effectiveness was assessed through final course evaluations wherestudents’ responses indicated the success of the course. This initiative represents a significantenhancement to the WPI’s RBE curriculum. By addressing
overall impact on coursepedagogical practice and objectives. Regardless, additional means of more effectively studyingchanged student perceptions in fundamental engineering topic delivery are planned for futureiterations of ENGR 111. As previously stated, the data used here comes from answers to a questionintentionally designed as a forced-choice ranking for the purposes of another study. However, theauthors were interested in this topic and wanted to see if it pointed towards any useful differencesbetween the two projects. For example, a Likert-type survey in which students separately rateperceived effectiveness of each topic (versus forced rankings that by nature place topics at “thebottom” of a listing) will allow much more nuanced analyses
Preuss, EdD, is the Co-founder and Lead Consultant for Exquiri Consulting, LLC. His primary focus is providing assistance to grant project teams in planning and development, through external evaluation, and as publication support. Most of his workDr. Matthew Lucian Alexander P.E., Texas A&M University, Kingsville Dr. Alexander graduated with a BS in Engineering Science from Trinity University, a MS in Chemical Engineering from Georgia Tech, and a PhD in Chemical Engineering from Purdue University. He worked for 25 years in environmental engineering consulting befMr. Rajashekar Reddy Mogiligidda, Texas A&M University, Kingsville Rajashekar Mogiligidda is working as a Lecturer in the department of Mechanical and
fall quarter of their first academic year both Scholars andother pre-major engineering students throughout the department were invited to complete a presurvey, with entry into a gift card drawing offered as an incentive. The research study receivedInstitutional Review Board approval and all participants completed an informed consent form atthe time of their first survey administration. To create a matched group of Comparison students,individuals were identified within the pool of non-Scholar pre survey respondents who weresimilar to Scholars in terms of academic trajectories (i.e., planned major) as well asdemographics (self-identified gender, race/ethnicity, and first-generation student status). BothScholars and the identified Comparison
team members, it is possible thatimplementing it as a hands-on activity would bring additional value. A hands-on activity wouldrequire additional planning, resources, class time, and clean-up but may be worth the effort,especially in the context of a first-year engineering course that does emphasize hands-onactivities and prototyping. Therefore, this is a step that will be considered in the future.Although the survey results suggest that the video and activities had value, the actual effect onteamwork was not formally measured. Measuring the effect conclusively may be challengingdue to the many factors that affect how a team functions (the members of the team, the classroomenvironment created by the instructors and teaching assistants, the
(participantdesign solutions).In the second stage, n = 25 engineering faculty from various universities attending the First-Year Engineering Experience (FYEE) conference completed the first ACJ session. Thesecond ACJ session was completed by n = 46 first-year engineering students from the samelarge public R1 university as the initial research stage; however, it should be noted that due tothe timing of the panel and the data collection activities, none of the panelists had personallycompleted the ping pong design task. The student ACJ panel was conducted as part of aclassroom activity. For both ACJ panels all participants for each session took part at the sametime in large open plan spaces
each project and categorized them according to the description, emphasis of theprojects, and special requirements.Table 1: The project ideas, including project titles, codes (themes) and special requirements.1- Sustainable Rural Development Students develop site planning, power systems and assistiveCall for Proposals systems for various needs for a rural community. They conduct aCodes: S, P full design process (framing, ideation, prototyping) in a team of 4-6 students over ~6 weeks. The options include greenhouseSpecial Requirements: None control system, natural hazard protection, automated crop harvester, and etc.2
constructing thewind turbine (or not) and why? If so, which location would you recommend and why? Prompt 3 -How does your recommendation impact the [three pillars of sustainability]? Prompt 4 - Identify a facet of your DS2 design project which involves an ethical dilemma and discuss briefly.Student and Faculty PerspectivesStudents were also provided opportunities to comment in open form within the above surveys.Comments from the Fall 2021 offering of the course highlight the lack of ethics integration intothe design aspects of the course: “The Ethics Week at the end felt a bit out of the ordinary coming after two design sessions back to back.”For the Fall 2022 offering of the course, students noted the planned
, investments, and planning for the future. I am most interested in the investments part of financial literacy. Making an investment that could eventually grow and aid in my retirement in the future sounds very appealing to me. Another student stated that “Financial literacy is about teaching you money arrangement. Growing up I did have to learn a lot on my own about finances and one of the main difficulties that I still face today is with building credit. I have yet to start a credit at the age of 20. Part of me doesn't find it useful for the time being but I know at some point I will need it. My fear with credit is that I simply don't know where to start and/or how to apply and where to apply.” This
thatassessment and standards were the same across both sections. The upper-level course typicallyfollows a design structure based on writing a series of documents that frame a proposed designproject and then detail discrete plans for its completion. These assignments and a briefdescription are as follows: Request for Proposal: A document meant to frame the need for the project. Students write as if they are an industry partner framing the request for the engineering work that needs to be completed. In COM 420, this document is occasionally drafted in collaboration with real industry partnerships to give students a direct sense of working across institutions. Requirements: A document that outlines the requirements for
emphasize peer interactions,reinforcing the sense of empowerment-through-community as the LMP. (For a brief introductionto some of these methods, we recommend Ericson [20].) Moreover, we believe the programiteration process through which the program is continuously formed and reformed throughstudent feedback enhances student self-efficacy and empowerment. While our current program issmall, making our conclusions difficult to generalize to larger populations, the evidence providedhere provides a step toward understanding and developing best practices for peer mentorshipprograms. We recommend that institutions who may wish to implement similar programs withtheir STEM students involve the participants in the planning and implementation of
and Three are accomplished through introduction ofstudents to the basic foundational concepts and skills in the four-degree programs and byinvestigating course plans for the various majors and traditional careers within the disciplines.The gateway course learning outcomes are presented below: 1. Develop an academic pathway for success in the student's selected major. 2. Select appropriate strategies and technologies to solve technical problems. 3. Apply foundational principles and tools of electrical, industrial, manufacturing, and mechanical engineering technology to address technical problems. 4. Apply computational tools to address technical problems. 5. Work in a team to solve an engineering technology problem. 6
the lab activities tied to the investigated technical skills. Therefore, preliminaryresults confirm that the new proposed course can be considered successful. Insights fromstudents’ feedback will be considered for improvement for Fall 2023.Future plans include developing a pre-course survey in addition to the exit survey and extendingthese surveys to all the sections in the ECE program to have higher number of participants. Along-term study will be conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of this course in guaranteeingstudents’ success and satisfaction and in increasing the retention rate of first-year students.Moreover, the impact on students’ success from diverse groups will be analyzed. References
should take (e.g., over email, in person, online chat,etc.), what additional training may be helpful for the faculty and peer mentors to be effectivementors to this population of students, and generally what aspects of the mentoring experience ismost impactful for the students. We plan to use these results to improve the existing scholarshipprogram and to share effective strategies with the engineering community on how to motivateand support engineering transfer students.AcknowledgmentThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant #1742627. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this materialare those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the
quality and howto mitigate the problems associated with poorly ventilated buildings were thoroughly discussedwith the students through journal articles and real-life examples. Each week students werepresented with an outlined lesson plan that described how to build and test the C-R boxes, andthe ethical implications of this project were frequently discussed with them. In addition to building the C-R boxes and discussing their impact, students also plottedgraphs to quantify the aerosol concentrations in the air with and without the C-R boxes over aperiod of time. They validated the effectiveness of the boxes in reducing particle concentration.Students used the “Physics Toolbox Sensor Suite'' app to collect and record data on the g-Forceto
wisely. Good study habits include setting clearand achievable goals, creating a study plan, and taking regular breaks. Developing good studyhabits is critical in engineering, as it allows engineers to be more productive and efficient in theirwork.(v) Participation in Internships or Co-opsAnother chief constituent of the course is emphasizing the importance of participation in aninternship or co-op. Participation in these opportunities allows engineering students to work onreal-world projects, gain valuable work experience, develop important skills, and network withengineering professionals and mentors. This helps them make connections in the industry, whichmay lead to future job opportunities. Additionally, internships and co-ops provide an