will provide actionablestrategies grounded in educational research and real-world implementation.Background and ContextWhy Service Learning?Service-learning is a dynamic teaching tool that empowers faculty to seamlessly integrateacademic course content with meaningful community-based experiences. This pedagogicalapproach purposefully engages students in active learning situations that foster deeperunderstanding of subject matter while simultaneously developing competencies tied to criticalconsciousness and social impact [1]. The classroom and community components work in tandem,creating a symbiotic relationship where theoretical knowledge enhances practical application andreal-world experiences enrich academic discussions. Through this process
-world applications. ● Develop basic proficiency in MATLAB programming, enabling students to write, modify, and debug code for controlling robotic systems. ● Utilize Simulink to model and simulate robotic arm movements, gaining experience with block diagram modeling of dynamic systems. ● Establish a direct Ethernet connection between Simulink and a robotic arm, allowing students to run real-time simulations and observe the corresponding physical movements. ● Optimize their MATLAB code for performance and efficiency, applying best practices in coding to reduce computational overhead and improve real-time system response.ImplementationThis instructional module is integrated into thefundamentals of engineering design course
survey data collected from two large sections of the course (n= 211), the research examines which components students find most useful, how the courseaffects their confidence in major selection, and what changes might improve its impact. Througha combination of descriptive statistics and thematic analysis, the study offers actionablerecommendations to enhance the seminar experience and support more confident, informeddecisions.Survey results indicated that while more than half of students felt highly confident in their majorselection, a significant proportion remained uncertain or open to reconsidering their choice.Department presentations were generally rated as helpful, especially for understanding careerpathways and real-world applications
the stream welcomes students of all disciplines (STEMengineering, STEM non-engineering, and non-STEM). The purpose of this paper is to discuss thecore teaching methods, developed by the BR faculty leader to (1) accelerate the scientific andtechnical knowledge of first-year students, (2) mentor students as they conduct, college-levelresearch with the goal of innovation beyond current class curricula and (3) ensure studentsdevelop real-world technical skills they can deploy after matriculating out of the program.Program MethodsIn the BR Stream, students are guided through a one-year process of designing, developing andbuilding a bio inspired robot to address a specific field application. Class structure is divided intofour components: (1) in
of course material (real world applications),expectation of success (scaffolding of larger assignments), interest in learning (active learning),and perception of instructor caring (help with navigating their first year).Curricular ApproachBoth courses in the ID3EA sequence meet 3 times a week for 80 minutes for Lecture, Recitationand Campus Engagement. Lectures have approximately 120 students per section, and contain amix of traditional lecture elements, active learning, group work, and guest speakers. Recitationshave approximately 40 students and contain a mix of active learning and group working time.Campus Engagement meetings have approximately 250 students and include advising support,guest speakers, exams and group work.The first
statement was created to grab attention. The real-world application of automating a process – Plant Watering was introduced to the students, and they were asked to think about the process they would implement that would check the plant’s ecosystem and determine whether the plant needs to be watered. This was done to spark curiosity among these high schoolers as to how they can address a real-world scenario with technicality. Figure 1 shows what was presented in the slides for the brainstorming session. Figure 1: Hook statement for brainstormingFollowing brainstorming, guidance on how to proceed with the design is provided. Students were askedto choose their priorities, such as using a small computer to
engineering program.Preliminary Results and DiscussionThe interdisciplinary learning kit was piloted as an extra credit assignment in MEE 1117 -Fundamentals of Mechanical Engineering Design at Temple University during Spring 2025. Eachgroup of two students received a kit containing a 3D-printed turbine assembly, a caliper, and anAllen key. Students measured the components using calipers and replicated them in SolidWorks,applying CAD features such as sketching, extrusion, and patterning. While they were not requiredto model standard components like bearings and fasteners, they researched and importedmanufacturer models and toolbox parts, reinforcing real-world design practices. To assessunderstanding and streamline grading, a quiz was given via Canvas
Engineering from the University of Pittsburgh. Dr. Barillas’s focus is on first-year engineering education, student engagement, interdisciplinary learning, and inclusive pedagogy. As Program Director for ID3EA, she has led curriculum development initiatives that integrate hands-on design, teamwork, and real-world problem-solving into the foundational course sequence. Her teaching emphasizes active learning, student-centered instruction, and the development of professional skills such as technical communication, collaboration, and ethical decision-making. Her research interests include interdisciplinary education, curriculum innovation, and the retention and success of underrepresented students in engineering
open-ended problems using creative and analytical approaches. 5. Apply the steps of the engineering design process to develop and evaluate solutions. 6. Manage tasks, deadlines, and team responsibilities across a multi-component project.Innovation ComponentThe innovation component of the project allows students to be creative, practice critical thinking,and connect classroom work to real-world applications. Each team selects one of four energy-related themes: Renewable Energy, Hydroelectric Energy, Energy Cost, or Energy Flow.Individually, members complete a brainstorming assignment, identifying real-world problemsand proposing innovative solutions related to their theme. In the next class, each memberpresents their best idea, and the
development by Godwin [4] shows that students who see themselves asvalued benefactors to engineering tasks are more likely to persist in the field.Leveraging upon this body of work, this study looks into the impact of integrating a specificcollaborative, student-led learning activity within the previously mentioned first-yearIntroduction to Engineering course. Specifically, we investigate how the procedure of creatingand utilizing student-generated instructional videos developed by peers affects key studentoutcomes. As part of this course, students take part in a 4-week team project focused onpredicting urban air quality using real-world data and basic machine learning techniques inPython. A key feature of this project requires student teams to
qualities of the different majors. Studentsmight have only a vague notion of what engineers do, making it difficult for them todistinguish between majors based on real-world application or disciplinary focus.In this paper, we explore the relationship between students’ intended major and theirexpressed career goals. Through our mixed methods study, we ask the question:To what extent do first-year engineering students' stated career goals align withtheir intended majors during the first weeks of a general engineering programand what do these patterns suggest about pre-discursive conceptions ofengineering identity?For this paper, we focus on how students’ stated professional goals relate to the majorthey indicated they intended to pursue.The goal of