Collection

2025 Rocky Mountain Section Conference

Authors

Mridusmita Saikia; Stephanie Fuchs

] C. L. Dym, A. M. Agogino, O. Eris, D. D. Frey, and L. J. Leifer, “Engineering DesignThinking, Teaching, and Learning,” J. Eng. Educ., vol. 94, no. 1, pp. 103–120, Jan. 2005, doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2005.tb00832.x.[3] A. R. Carberry, H. Lee, and M. W. Ohland, “Measuring Engineering Design Self‐Efficacy,” J. Eng. Educ., vol. 99, no. 1, pp. 71–79, Jan. 2010, doi: 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2010.tb01043.x.[4] A. J. Dutson, R. H. Todd, S. P. Magleby, and C. D. Sorensen, “A Review of Literature onTeaching Engineering Design Through Project‐Oriented Capstone Courses,” J. Eng. Educ., vol.86, no. 1, pp. 17–28, Jan. 1997, doi: 10.1002/j.2168-9830.1997.tb00260.x.[5] D. A. Kolb, Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning

Collection

2025 Rocky Mountain Section Conference

Authors

Randy Hurd; Sulabh Khadka; Dustin Grote

in college. Ashley et al., (2017) explored the goals of 14 differentSTEM Summer Bridge programs across the United States and divided those in three parts: 1)academic success goals—providing students with foundational knowledge in a STEM domain, 4improving student content knowledge in a discipline, maximizing student GPA, increasingresearch participation, increasing student retention, and increasing student graduation rate fromthe college; 2) psychosocial goals—increase interest in the major, improve student sense ofbelonging, increase student sense of preparedness, increase student self-efficacy, and networkwith students and faculty; and 3