University Katrina is an educator with more than 30 years in the K-12 and Special Education systems. She has taught at the elementary level, in CTE with HS students, and most recently was an administrator in Special Education overseeing curriculum, assessments, and Professional Development for a staff of over 40. She is currently working with a team of researchers, two professors and a PhD student, on First Year Engineering experiences. She is a PhD student in Applied Cognitive Sciences and Human Factors at Michigan Technological University. Her interests include Learning Theory, self-efficacy, 3D spatial visualization, Women in Engineering, and GRIT.Dr. Akua B. Oppong-Anane, Montana Technological University Akua
Paper ID #36371First Year Engineering Student Definitions of Systems Engineering: AComparison Between Two InstitutionsMrs. Katrina L Carlson, Michigan Technological University Katrina Carlson is currently working with a team of researchers at Michigan Technological University as a PhD student in Applied Cognitive Sciences and Human Factors.Dr. Akua B. Oppong-Anane, Montana Technological University Akua Oppong-Anane is an Assistant Professor of Freshman Engineering at Montana Technological Uni- versity. She holds a bachelor’s degree in Chemical Engineering, a master’s degree in Chemistry and a doctoral degree in
Development and is active with ASCE’s ExCEEd Workshop.Dr. Benjamin B Wheatley, Bucknell University Benjamin Wheatley was awarded a B.Sc. degree in Engineering from Trinity College (Hartford, CT, USA) in 2011 and a Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering from Colorado State University (Fort Collins, CO, USA) in 2017. He is currently an Assistant Professor in the Department of Mechanical Engineering at Bucknell University (Lewisburg, PA, USA). His pedagogical areas of interest include active learning ap- proaches, ethics, and best practices as they relate to computational modeling. He runs the Mechanics and Modeling of Orthopaedic Tissues Laboratory at Bucknell, where they use computational and experimental techniques to better
prior knowledge, from a variety of appropriate resources. All the above-mentioned bullet points indicate self-directed learning as a powerful tool that leads to students becoming responsible learners over the semester, while reducing the dependance on the expected instructions from the instructors. B. Adopting new assessment techniques The evaluation techniques have a major influence on the student’s learning strategies. The assessment techniques should be designed in a way that would encourage students to remain focused in their learning process and feel the enthusiasm and joy to continue learning in the hope of a better grade. There should be several stages of grading throughout the semester for the application-based
B.S. work was in mass transfer and distillation. After three years working in industry, Prof. Brigham received his Ph.D. in 2006. His thesis work was focused on the interplay of the human commensal organism/opportunistic pathogen Bacteroides fragilis with the mammalian host. Specifically, he examined sugar utilization and how it affects the commensal and pathogenic lifestyles of B. fragilis. Prof. Brigham then moved to Massachusetts Institute of Technology as a postdoctoral scholar and later a Research Scientist. It was during this time that he developed a passion for bioman- ufacturing, fermentation and bioprocess engineering. He examined the industrially relevant bacterium Ralstonia eutropha (now known as
members One or more “slacker” team members 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Percentage of Respondents Did not experience conflict Not a factor Possibly a factor Definitely a factor Figure 4. Student responses to the question, “How much, if any, interpersonal conflict occurred within your team due to…” over the past three course offerings: (a) Fall 2019 (face-to-face), (b) Fall 2020 (fully online), and (c) Fall 2021 (hybrid).It is of note that a higher percentage of students in the fully online modality (Fall 2020) reportedthat they did not
Paper ID #36380WIP: Adaptive Comparative Judgement as a Tool for Assessing First-YearEngineering Design ProjectsDr. Clodagh Reid, Technological University of the Shannon: Midlands Midwest PhD in spatial ability and problem solving in engineering education from Technological University of the Shannon: Midlands Midwest, Ireland. Graduated in 2017 from the University of Limerick, Ireland with a B. Tech (Ed.). Member of Technology Education Research Group (TERG).Mr. Gibin Raju, University of Cincinnati Gibin Raju is a doctoral student in Engineering Education at the College of Engineering and Applied Sci- ence at the
is a fellow of the American Society for Engineering Education and the National Society of Professional Engineers.Dr. Carla B. Zoltowski, Purdue University at West Lafayette (COE) Carla B. Zoltowski is an assistant professor of engineering practice in the Elmore Family School of Elec- trical and Computer Engineering and (by courtesy) School of Engineering Education, and Director of the Vertically Integrated Projects (VIP) Program within the College of Engineering at Purdue. Prior to her appointment in ECE, Dr. Zoltowski was Co-Director of the EPICS Program. She holds a B.S.E.E., M.S.E.E., and Ph.D. in Engineering Education, all from Purdue. Her research interests include the pro- fessional formation of engineers
-on projects typicallyoffered in GNEG 1121/1121H were put on hold and Excel assignments that originally wasplanned for later in the semester were shifted to replace them. When it was clear that studentswould not be returning to the classroom, additional Excel topics on data analysis were deployedto replace the hands-on projects and the exam was given remotely through Blackboard.Fall 2020, we were able to rearrange our classroom to fit nearly half of a full-size section. GNEG1111/1111H courses were delivered in a hybrid manner, in which students were divided intogroups A and B. Group A could physically attend on the first day of class (Monday or Tuesday),group B could attend on the second day of class (Wednesday or Thursday), and students
; Zurhellen, H. S. (1978). Student attitudes toward the grade contract. Improving College and University Teaching, 26(4), 239-242.[7] Frank, T., & Scharff, L. L. (2013). Learning contracts in undergraduate courses: Impacts on student behaviors and academic performance. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 36-53.[8] Hiller, T. B., & Hietapelto, A. B. (2001). Contract grading: Encouraging commitment to the learning process through voice in the evaluation process. Journal of Management Education, 25(6), 660-684.[9] Inoue, A. B. (2019). Labor-based grading contracts: Building equity and inclusion in the compassionate writing classroom. WAC Clearinghouse.[10] Carillo, E. C. (2021). The
College Health Association, “American college health association-National college health assessment III: Reference group executive summary fall 2020,” Silver Spring, MD: American College Health Association, 2020, pp. 1–22.[2] L. Acharya, L. Jin, and W. Collins, “College life is stressful today – Emerging stressors and depressive symptoms in college students,” J. Am. Coll. Heal., vol. 66, no. 7, pp. 655– 664, Oct. 2018.[3] C. Foster and L. Spencer, “Are undergraduate engineering students at greater risk for heart disease than other undergraduate students?,” J. Eng. Educ., vol. 92, no. 1, 2003.[4] C. S. Conley, A. C. Kirsch, D. A. Dickson, and F. B. Bryant, “Negotiating the transition to college
Benchmarksfor Undergraduate Engineering Schools, Departments and Programs.” https://ira.asee.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/2017-Engineering-by-the-Numbers-3.pdf (accessed May 27, 2022).[2] B. N. Geisinger and D. Rajraman, “Why they leave: Understanding student attrition fromengineering majors,” International Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 29, no. 4, pp.914-925, 2013.[3] L. A. Jackson, P. D. Gardner, and L. A. Sullivan, “Engineering persistence: Past, present, andfuture factors and gender differences,” Higher Education, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 227-246, 1993.[4] R. A. Berkowitz and K. O’Quin, “Predictors of graduation of readmitted “at risk” collegestudents,” Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory, & Practice, vol. 8, no. 2, pp
Workshop: Let’s Talk to Our Rubber Ducks: Scavenger Hunt for Computational Thinking, Analyzing Code, & DebuggingIntroductionA rubber duck can act as a sounding board for programmers to work through difficult conceptsor complicated logic sequences. Speaking or explaining code logic out loud is known to behighly beneficial when “stuck” by an error. Andrew Errington created the concept of “rubberduck debugging”. A good programmer needs to develop several essential skills includingdebugging, computational thinking, and code analysis. How do we instill these concepts intofirst-year programming students? Introductory programming students are often reluctant to trydebugging their code independently. Introductory programming
Paper ID #36343Full Paper: Student Reflections on Team Experiences in a First-YearEngineering CourseDr. Jenahvive K. Morgan, Michigan State University Dr. Jenahvive Morgan is the instructor for EGR 100 - Introduction to Engineering Design and Aca- demic Director of the First-Year Engineering CoRe Experience at Michigan State University. She is also currently the Director of Positions for the ASEE Women in Engineering Division, as well as an ASCE ExCEED Fellow. Dr. Morgan has a PhD and MS in Environmental Engineering from the University of Michigan, and a BS in Chemical Engineering from Michigan State University. Her
Paper ID #36357GIFTS: Engineers in gear: Building a student support model to transcendthe COVID eraDr. Sheldon Levias, University of Washington Dr. Sheldon Levias is an Associate Director from the University of Washington’s College of Engineering (UW CoE) Student Academic Services Team, and he manages the CoE’s Engineering Academic Center, or EAC. Sheldon has strong connections to the UW, the CoE, and the Seattle area. He holds a B.S. in Electrical Engineering from the UW and an M.A. in Teaching from Seattle Pacific University. Sheldon taught middle school mathematics and science for several years, and went on to obtain
Paper ID #36374WIP: Wrap-Around Advising: A Collaborative Effort Between FacultyMembers and Student Success ProfessionalsDr. Andrew Assadollahi, P.E., Christian Brothers University Dr. Assadollahi is a native Memphian and a 2005 graduate of Christian Brothers High School. Dr. As- sadollahi earned a B.S. in Civil Engineering with a concentration in structural engineering from Christian Brothers University in 2009. He also earned a B.S. in Mathematics from Christian Brothers University in 2009, concentrating in applied differential equations. He earned a M.S. in Civil Engineering from The University of Memphis in 2010 with a
Paper ID #36393WIP: The Student’s Perspective on CAD Software in a First-Year CivilEngineering Graphics CourseProf. Raymond Eugene McGinnis Jr., Christian Brothers University Professor McGinnis is an Associate Professor in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at Christian Brothers University in Memphis, Tennessee. He has thirty-nine years of experience teach- ing engineering courses. He has taught thirty-four years at Christian Brothers University. He teaches courses in Transportation Engineering and Construction Engineering. Required courses include: Civil Engineering Graphics, Geomatics and Lab
Paper ID #36353Work in Progress: Success and Retention Strategies for STEM GatekeeperCourses in a Community CollegeMs. Nada Veskovic, Lehigh Carbon Community College Nada Veskovic is an Associate Professor of Electronics at Lehigh Carbon Community College. She teaches a variety of electrical technology courses. Her interests include active learning approaches, peer learning, and strategies that focus on increasing retention and graduation rates. Before joining LCCC, she worked in the industry as an electrical engineer in project design and management roles. American c
Workshop: Introduction to Adaptive Comparative Judgement: A Holistic Assessment tool for Design Problems Clodagh Reid1, Sheryl A. Sorby2, Gibin Raju2, Niall Seery1 1 Faculty of Engineering and Informatics, Technological University of the Shannon 2 Department of Engineering Education, University of CincinnatiAbstractThis workshop is an interactive session where participants will experience an excitingapproach for holistically assessing design problems, Adaptive Comparative Judgement(ACJ). ACJ is an adaptive software tool that can be used by students and faculty to assessstudents’ work holistically and reliably. This tool can be used to reduce the grading
Paper ID #36334GIFTS: The secret is in the details. Improving oral presentation skillswith a peer and self-assessed feedback module.Ms. Sarah Lynn Benson, Northeastern University I am a third-year undergraduate student at Northeastern University working towards my degree in chemi- cal engineering. I am passionate about mentoring first-year engineering students.Dr. Leila Keyvani Someh, Northeastern University Dr. Keyvani is an Associate Teaching professor in the First year Engineering program at Northeaster University. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2022
Workshop: The Integration of Technical Skills Within a First-Year EngineeringDesign and Innovation Course Featuring Hands-On ElectronicsSummary for the Conference Program:IntroductionOur college of engineering offers first-year engineering students an interdisciplinary hands-onproject-based engineering design course. The students learn several technical skills, such ascomputer-aided drawing and shop skills, as well as non-technical skills, such as team buildingand creativity. To facilitate the prototyping process, a curriculum has been developed to integratemore technical skills that are deemed critical. The first phase of the developed curriculum allowsstudents to experience 3D printing and laser cutting. Students learn how to design a
Paper ID #36402WIP: Investigating the relationship between FYE students’ reflectionsand academic performance across genderMr. Ahmed Ashraf Butt, Purdue University at West Lafayette (COE) Ahmed Ashraf Butt is a doctoral candidate in the school of engineering education at Purdue University with a multidisciplinary research focus that combines theory and practice in the area of learning science, Human-computer interaction (HCI), and engineering education. His primary research focuses on design- ing and developing educational technologies that can facilitate different aspects (e.g., engagement) of the students’ learning and
list provided. Turn in a document containing the following: a. Group Name b. Group number c. List of all group members including e-mail addresses d. Name of group leader e. Project Idea (Bullet point 1 from the “Design an App” slide) f. A one-paragraph description of the major functions of the app. 2. Phase 2 built on phase 1 by adding the following additional information: a. A few paragraphs describing what the app does and how it would be used for some common cases. b. A listing of all the requirements of the app. These are relatively large-scale functions. “Creating the user interface” is not a task, since various functions will
collectionmodel and mitigate potential team conflict and seek potential leadership for team building. Theresearch question is: Could CATME help to identify team conflicts and leadership in a multi-disciplinary small-size team environment?Experimental MethodsTwelve undergraduate students (most of them were first-year students) were split into twoproject teams with even student numbers. Team A aimed to build a soft robotic gripper, whileTeam B aimed to build a voice-activated robotic arm. During the team formation stage, Team Aused an interest-driven approach to assign individual tasks, while Team B used a merit-basedapproach to assign individual tasks. In Team A, the students were allocated the tasks based ontheir own learning objectives. In Team B, the
. Barrella, E., et al. . “A mixedmethods study of cognitive and affective learning during a sophomore design problembased service learning experience”. International Journal for Service Learning in Engineering, Special Edition(Fall), 2013, pp. 1-28.[9] K. Litchfield, A. Javernick‐Will, and A. Maul. "Technical and professional skills of engineers involved and not involved in engineering service." Journal of Engineering Education 105.1, 2016, pp. 70-92.[10] Redacted[11] L. Piket-May, and J. Avery, Service-learning First Year Design Retention Results, ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference. October 10-13, 2001, Reno, NV.[12] B. Ropers-huilman. , Carwile, L., and Lima, M. “Service-learning in engineering
success methodologies are low cost to both students andfaculty. For students, low cost implies the methods must be very efficient, i.e., easy to learn andimplement, rapidly implemented, and have a high rate of learning. High impact is related toeffectiveness in learning. The crux of effectiveness is not if a particular method works (itwouldn’t be used if it didn’t work) but whether students will consistently use the method. Thiscrux element—will students use the success skill—is generally overshadowed by how well themethod would work if employed and taught regardless of whether students will actually use it.From a faculty standpoint, low cost consists of a) a small learning curve, b) little disruption tostatus quo, i.e., readily integrated into
outcomes. Journal of Adolescence, 17, 1994, pp. 327–339.[4] Eyler, J., & Giles, D.E. (1999). Where’s the learning in service-learning? San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass.[5] A. W. Astin, L. J. Sax & J. Avalos, J. Long-term effects of volunteerism during the undergraduate years. Review of Higher Education, 22(2), 1999, pp. 187–202.[6] A. Furco, et al. "Modeling the influence of service-learning on academic and sociocultural gains: Findings from a multi-institutional study." Civic engagement and community service at research universities. Palgrave Macmillan, London, 2016. 143-163.[7] B. Jaeger, & E. LaRochelle, E.. EWB2 – Engineers Without Borders: Educationally, a world of
.[10] L. A. Schreiner, “From surviving to thriving during transitions,” in Thriving in transitions: A research-based approach to college student success, L. A. Schreiner, M. C. Louis, and D. D. Nelson, Eds. Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina, National Resource Center for The First-Year Experience and and Students in Transition, 2012, pp. 1–18.[11] M. A. Hutchison, D. K. Follman, M. Sumpter, and G. M. Bodner, “Factors influencing the self-efficacy beliefs of first-year engineering students.,” J. Eng. Educ., vol. 95, no. 1, pp. 39–47, Jan. 2006, [Online]. Available: http://search.ebscohost.com.proxybz.lib.montana.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&A N=19552472&site=ehost-live[12] B. L. Yoder, “Going
by the rater, With the model’s conditional variance of .616,the model explains 61.6% of the variance in rating values.There was a statistically significant difference in values given to ratees when the rater and rateehad different genders (p=.006, b=-.025) and indicates that when raters and ratees had differentgenders, their values given to ratees would decrease by .25 points on the 9-point Likert scalecompared with raters and ratees of the same gender. For instances in which raters and ratees hada different race or ethnicity (p=.002, b=.024), values given to ratees would increase by .24 pointson the 9-point Likert scale compared with raters and ratees of the same race or ethnicity. Studentratees and raters being of different race