of lesson plans. While we had originally planned to do a full implementation of theIODE curriculum in Fall 2020, due to the pandemic and classes being online, we waited untilFall 2021, when classes resumed in person, to fully implement the new curriculum and collectdata for comparison to Fall 2019.In Fall of 2019, each class started with a lecture going over the topic for the day, followed bytime in class for students to complete problems by mimicking examples from the instructor hadjust worked. Sometimes, a small portion of the lecture would be dedicated to why the giventechnique worked. However, the focus was on what to do rather than why it worked.The IODE curriculum implemented in Fall 2021 covered largely the same topics as Fall 2019
attendance of each SI session was58%. Figure 1. SS students attending and SI session.Two peer mentors in their second year were selected to lead the SS students through the SIsessions. The peer-mentors were chosen from a group of students who completed a pilot versionof the SS Program the previous year. Weekly meetings between the peer mentors and theinstructors of the math and engineering courses were used to plan the following week’s SIsessions according to need. Common session types included: ● HW - Informal open-ended sessions where students met on one floor at the University Library designed for study groups. Peer mentors were in the room to answer questions and guide the SS students when needed, but did not actively lead content
STEM. Craftingmitigation plans aimed at student success should be research based and implemented to welcomeand benefit all students. Researchers have worked to identify predictors of STEM persistence,both before matriculation and after. A student’s level of academic success before matriculation isa strong predictor of STEM persistence. These predictors include standardized test scores andtaking calculus in high school [9], [10].Research has found that, after matriculation, a student’s likelihood to complete an undergraduatedegree was linked to a student’s level of academic and social integration. Tinto [11] definesacademic integration by a student's academic performance and their perception of their ownacademic experience. Therefore, it
importance of planning, executing and evaluating subjects that are linked to the interestsand objectives of the courses in which these ones are being offered, reflecting on what skillswe want students to acquire and how these are used in their careers.Prado [4] also suggest that it is necessary to develop a more contextualized, consolidated andattractive course, applying multidisciplinary and transdisciplinary activities, using activemethodologies, articulating practice and theory with the support of software, a fact that is alsohighlighted in the document that in Brazil guides the organization of engineering programs,the National Curriculum Regulations for Engineering Education (DCN1) [13].Stewart, Larson, and Zandieh [7] emphasize the need of
classroominstruction before the pandemic.Studies have shown that online education had a specific impact on engineering students. In [3], authorsfound that a considerable number of students changed their short-term plans about scheduling courses infuture semesters. Additionally, a noteworthy portion of students expressed concerns about theeffectiveness of online instruction. STEM students had to spend more time on self-directed learning andincreased time on their coursework overall [4]. Research has shown that blended (or hybrid) learninggenerally leads to better learning outcomes for STEM courses compared to non-STEM courses.However, paradoxically, students enrolled in hybrid STEM courses often report lower levels ofsatisfaction and may not view the courses
study hasexamined how these variables differ in relation to students’ levels of mathematics proficiency.Thus, much knowledge is left to be gained.Present StudyThe current study is a part of a larger, grant-funded study focused on cultivating InclusiveProfessional Engineering Identities within engineering majors. Participants in the study werefrom a large, R1 university and were all first-year students planning to major in engineering orcomputer science. The university divided the students into three different engineering tracks fortheir first year, representative of their level of mathematics preparation upon college entrancebased upon their mathematics achievement and coursework in high school. Students onEngineering Track 1 were deemed to be
grading approach, the author faced many obstacles andchallenges, which required extra thought and planning for the future semesters. For instance,many students procrastinated and only came for reassessments at the end of the semester,causing long lines outside the office during office hours. This was a heavy burden for theinstructor and left insufficient time for providing individualized feedback, which was the purposeof the office hour reassessments. The unlimited number of attempts did not sufficiently motivatestudents to perform better on their first tries. It also generated an excessive amount of grading.The author needs to reevaluate the number of reassessments allowed and encourage students toreflect and review before
interventions designed to improve student persistence across all student groups. Perhapsthe most relevant finding in support of the research discussed in this paper is that increasing thefrequency of asking students to retrieve precalculus skills improves their retention acrosssubsequent semesters, better preparing them for courses later in their plans of study and tocomplete their engineering degrees [8]. It should be noted that while that study investigated thefrequency of retrieval in a precalculus course, it follows that incorporating space retrieval withinlater mathematics courses would benefit students.Considering the impact of calculus courses on retention and persistence within engineeringprograms, there is a clear need for intervention
) onsiders pre-math-ready engineering students' outlook on their place in engineering C Transition Self related to their perceived identity and sense of belonging in engineering as they into transition into the major (ex: plans for their future career) Engineering efers to the help that pre-math-ready engineering students receive in engineering R (identity) Support related to identity formation as they transition into the major (ex: affinity groups) Describes the strategies pre-math-ready engineering students use to develop their
those students that,despite completing MATH 101 satisfactorily, they did not approve MATH 201. Among them,we can mention: (i) the violation of academic integrity when completing the activities in MATH101, (ii) a student may require more time and additional practice than the one provided byMATH 101 to grasp a concept, and (iii) the lack of motivation and engagement, among others.Further study is required to examine these peculiar cases. Constructing a predictive model is partof our future research plan; this will provide us with more insights regarding the probability ofsuccess in MATH 201 after a student has completed MATH 101.The diagnostic test segmentation into the four areas of MATH 101 allows us to explore furtherand establish its impact