student performance and theirperceptions about the course redesign will be presented. A list of lessons learned was identified.The preliminary results are promising and we are planning to implement the redesignedmethodology to other engineering fundamental mechanics courses.IntroductionStatics is a sophomore-level course covering topics including equilibrium of force systems;analysis of trusses, frames and machines; centroid; and moment of inertia of areas. Statics servesas a prerequisite for many subsequent courses including dynamics, mechanics of materials, etc.Statics poses special challenge to engineering students because it is often the first engineeringscience course they take. Moreover, students who have trouble with Statics often perform
, Ph.D., is an Associate Professor of Structural Engineering in the Department of Civil Engineering, in the Dwight Look College of Engineering at Texas A&M University. Luciana has been with Texas A&M University since 1999, and in that time has taught 15 different courses ranging from the freshman to graduate levels. She has been active in academic program and curriculum development from the department level to the university level, where she served as co-chair of the Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP) committee that determined the academic course of actions to be taken over the next accred- itation cycle to addresses critical issues related to enhancing student learning. She has received funding for her
6 learningoutcomes and good gains in 8 learning outcomes (see Table 1).Unsurprisingly, student learning during the pandemic was measurably lower than pre-pandemic.Five learning outcomes were significantly lower for the students enrolled in 2020 than for thoseenrolled in 2019: how ideas from this class relate to other classes; drawing appropriate FBDs forgiven systems; interest in taking or planning to take additional engineering classes; confidencethat you can do statics work; and comfort level in working with complex ideas (see Table 2).To further assess the extent to which these significant differences can be attributed to differencesbetween the two courses, we modeled each learning outcome. The timing of when students wereenrolled in the
’ lives that should be furtheraddressed by educational institutions to account for this population of students when planningpolicies and intervention plans. These might include for example “the development of more onlinecourse opportunities [that] may help these students succeed”, as well as offer them moreconvenience. In essence, the commuting aspect of students’ lives introduces the main theme thatif being a commuter means fewer opportunities for skill development, then providing supportonline would be a possible option for giving those commuters more access to skill buildingactivities (Nelson, Misra, Sype, & Mackie, 2016), and enforcing the idea that the traditionalsingular mode of learning followed by universities may not be the best
out of 38 responses (47%) remarked they would form some sort of plan using theidentified knowns, unknowns, and relevant equations. This compared with 15 out of 43 responses(35%) from the control group. The control group had a higher number of responses that suggestedtrying to use relevant equations without mentioning any form of planning (14 versus 8 responses).The other responses were either focused primarily on Free Body Diagrams or looking forunknowns only, or simply using a step-by-step brute force approach.Students in the experimental section were given the opportunity to report how their studypractices changed due to the exams, homework and grading for this course. Overall the responsesgenerally split students across a few divisions
‘patches’ of poor performance.” Faced with such adverseacademic situations, some students adopt maladaptive behaviors (e.g., self-handicapping andanxiety) that further impair their chances of succeeding in their chosen engineering majors. Incontrast, resilient students would adopt adaptive behaviors, for example, persistence, planning,optimism, and self-determination, among others [8]. We argue that students with high levels ofresilience are better able to come back from initial academic stresses, while those who are lessresilient may decline in their academic performance, lose interest in their major, andconsequently consider dropping out of their engineering program.Measurement approachesAs noted above, resilience is most commonly defined as a
ways the individual instructors may have attempted to alter things suchas test anxiety or perception of faculty caring. Additionally, in this study we have not examineddemographic differences, or differences in first-generation college student status. In future work,we plan to examine these factors and to see how initiatives to improve different NCA factorssuch as belongingness and grit affect student success. Finally, we also acknowledge that studentgrades are only one aspect of student success, and are interested in finding different ways tomeasure and define this metric.AcknowledgementsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under grantsDUE-1626185 (Cal Poly), DUE-1626287 (Purdue), and DUE-1626148 (UTEP
Paper ID #16487Preliminary Analysis of Spatial Ability Improvement within an EngineeringMechanics Course: StaticsSteven David Wood, Utah State University - Engineering Education Steven Wood is a junior in the Civil Engineering program. After finishing his BS he plans on completing a MS in Civil Engineering. In addition to studies, he is a teacher’s assistant and he teaches a recitation class for the Statics course. His Interests in the field of engineering are public transportation, specifically in rapid and heavy rail systems. His research interests include spatial ability, learning styles, and gender differences in
Independent Study Presentations Solve equilibrium problems and Peer Review based on friction forcesLectureClass was held two times per week for 110 minutes each period. Lectures, in general,covered about 20 minutes of class and were planned with a minimalistic approach,focusing on the essential points. The remainder of class period was designed for in-classactivities, including problem-solving as well as hands-on lab experiments.In-Class ActivityIn-class activities were based on active-learning strategy, in which students worked on aproblem posed by the instructor –at times individually and other times in pairs or ingroups, before participating in a class-wide discussion. The motivation of
toconcepts in the prerequisite physics course (e.g. vector analysis, particle equilibrium, and free-body diagrams). It could be interesting to compare these pre-course survey responses withstudent grades in physics. Perhaps the survey could replace other pre-course assessment toolsused to plan review topics to emphasize during class sessions and/or identify students foracademic support services such as tutoring.Knowledge Surveys to Support Learner Skill DevelopmentAs discussed above, one of the goals of developing the knowledge survey was for students to usethe tool to improve their academic skill and confidence. Several of the survey items underoutcome 1 specifically ask students to reflect on their confidence regarding tasks associated
framework, ConcepTests are typicallyqualitative and require no or very minimal numerical calculation, although they may requiremental imagination of the development of key equations. Also, some ConcepTests are intendedfor summative assessment and should follow specific guidelines; others may be open-ended andintended to provoke debate and force students to verbalize and justify their assumptions whenanswering questions (Beatty et al. 2006).Since the workshop, the team has had virtual meetings every 1-2 months to discuss conceptquestion development and to review progress. A systematic review process was set up toprovide feedback on all of the different questions, and to plan and manage initial student testingconducted at three different institutions
Research Fellowship. His research interests range from sophomore-level engineering curricula to spatial ability and creativity to student entrepreneurship.Mr. Steven David Wood, Utah State University Steven Wood is a junior in the Civil Engineering program. After finishing his BS he plans on completing a MS in Civil Engineering. In addition to studies, he is a teacher’s assistant and he teaches a recitation class for the Statics course. His Interests in the field of engineering are public transportation, specifically in rapid and heavy rail systems. His research interests include spatial ability, learning styles, and gender differences in meta-cognition. c American Society for Engineering
Mechanics Project across the three constituent courses was doneover a period of three years, as illustrated in Fig. 3. By accident of history, we implementedDynamics first. In one semester, we put in place all four of the major changes of (1) moving tothe flipped recitation using UGTAs and one lecture per module, (2) creating course materials—notes and examples—that allowed (3) the implementation of mastery-based grading, and (4) theintroduction of computing projects as a major component of the course. A year later we hoistedup Statics, and a year after that Deformable Solids.While not part of an intentional plan, there was some advantage to working through Dynamicsbefore Statics. For example, many of the notational decisions were made to support
, another class style needsto be developed which approximates the success of students in the flipped sections. Alternateformats which mandate and reward group performance may work. The balance between face-time and independent study will vary between groups of students.References1 NC State University Office of Institutional Research and Planning. (2016.) Spring 2016 Sophomore Survey. Retrieved from URL https://oirp.ncsu.edu/surveys/survey-reports/studentalumni-surveys/sophomore-survey.2 Lord, Susan M., et al. "Who's persisting in engineering? A comparative analysis of female and male Asian, black, Hispanic, Native American, and white students." Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering 15.2 (2009).3
given a unique hint meant to simulate therole of different perspectives on problem solving. For example, one hint asked students toconsider the effect of the moving crane load on the maximum shear and moment experienced bythe crane rail. Another hint gave students design tables from the AISC Manual of Steel Designand guidance to help them pick an appropriate shape. Teams completed the assignment outsideof class as homework. Plan View (view from above) Section View (view from end) 35 ft. 35 ft. Hoist is free to move Hoist