Conference Session

Bridge Programs Connecting to First-Year Engineering

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Rezvan Nazempour; Houshang Darabi, University of Illinois, Chicago; Peter C. Nelson, University of Illinois, Chicago; Renata A. Revelo, University of Illinois, Chicago; Yeow Siow, University of Illinois, Chicago; Jeremiah Abiade

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs, Pre-College Engineering Education

paired with a “student ambassador”. For Cohort1 Scholars (recruited for Fall 2018), student ambassadors consisted of academically successfuljuniors and seniors who were also leaders of professional societies. These Cohort 1 Scholars will,in turn, serve as student ambassadors for Cohort 2 Scholars (to be recruited for Fall 2019). Underthe mentorship of student ambassadors, the Scholars take part in a variety of daily activitiesincluding a moderated reflection session at the end of each day.The program is structured as follows:  It takes place during the summer prior to entering college.  It spans two full weeks, from Sunday through the second Saturday.  Each Scholar is paired with a student ambassador throughout the course of the program

Conference Session

First-Year Programs: Focusing on Student Success

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Abigail T. Stephan, Clemson University; Laurel Whisler, Clemson University; Elizabeth Anne Stephan, Clemson University; Bridget Trogden, Clemson University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

courses. Followingthe first round of exams, students select the course in which they wish to improve theirperformance most significantly and then complete both an exam wrapper survey and learningstrategies survey to evaluate their preparatory behaviors, conceptual understanding, andperformance on the exam. Each student develops an action plan for improvement based on theirresults and begins implementation immediately. Following the second exam, students completean exam wrapper survey followed by a learning journal, in which students evaluate and reflect ontheir adherence to and effectiveness of their action plan and performance on the second exam.We propose that engagement with this exam wrapper activity in the context of the EntangledLearning

Conference Session

First-Year Programs: Wednesday Cornucopia (Educational Research)

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Karen E. Rambo-Hernandez, West Virginia University; Melissa Lynn Morris, West Virginia University; Anne Marie Aramati Casper, Colorado State University ; Robin A. M. Hensel, West Virginia University; Jeremy Clinton Schwartz, West Virginia University; Rebecca A. Atadero, Colorado State University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

engineering can beexplored.MethodsStudy contextIn fall 2017, students in a total of eight sections of a common first-year engineering course tookfour surveys throughout the semester and were taught by three distinct instructors. Eachinstructor had an equal number of intervention (four sections, n =116) and comparison sections(four sections, n = 137).The students in the intervention sections participated in multiple activities, which are describedsubsequently. Table 1 shows when each of the activities occurred throughout the fall term.Table 1. Activities and Timeline Activity Week of Semester Dean’s Talk and Reflection Questions 2 Teamwork

Conference Session

First-Year Programs: Professional Skill Development

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Kathryn Schulte Grahame, Northeastern University; Susan F. Freeman, Northeastern University; Jake Alexander Levi, Northeastern University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

included in the communitypartnerships with two main foci: middle school robotics leagues and a community makerspace.Two surveys (Pre and Post course) helped to identify initial impressions and changes in students’(1) understanding of community partner’s geographic location, (2) impressions of location, (3)propensity to frequent a business in that location, and (4) knowledge of actual persons residing inthe community. Students were asked to write reflections after S-L site visits which acted asassessments of their growth in understanding of course concepts. The reflections were also usefulto see the students’ perception of professional growth and their perception of the community andtheir impact on it.Initial surveys indicated that news and word of

Conference Session

The Best of First Year Programs: Best Paper Session

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Janet Y. Tsai, University of Colorado, Boulder; Beth A. Myers, University of Colorado Boulder; Jacquelyn F. Sullivan, University of Colorado Boulder; Kenneth M. Anderson, University of Colorado Boulder

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

students, one instructor, and fiveteaching assistants, with course activities spread across multiple lecture, lab, and recitationsections meeting at different places in time and space.This research paper explores the consequences of this scaling for the students enrolled in thecourse, as well as for the instructors, teaching assistants, and facilities involved in courseimplementation. A mixed-methods approach featuring quantitative data including studentacademic performance metrics, demographic characteristics, and pre- and post-survey resultsrelated to attitudes and motivations to persist in engineering are combined with qualitative datafrom individual student interviews and textual responses to biweekly reflection questions tounderstand how the

Conference Session

Bridge Programs Connecting to First-Year Engineering

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Amanda Simson, The Cooper Union; Laura C. Broughton, City University of New York, Bronx Community; Elizabeth J. Biddinger, City College of the City University of New York

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs, Pre-College Engineering Education

student engagementsurvey also asked students to reflect on what they learned in the course, and asked them to reflecton how the course could be improved.Skills assessmentStudent performance was evaluated through a pre and post exam in mathematics, several quizzesand a final exam in the course, and through assignments and presentations. In addition, studentsself-evaluated themselves at the beginning and end of the course on a list of skills that werecovered. Students rated their confidence in each skill on a 4-point scale at the beginning and endof the course. The average score for skills in each category is shown in Figure 1 for both the2017 and 2018 cohort of students. At the beginning of the course, students felt the mostconfident in chemistry

Conference Session

First-Year Programs: Work in Progress Postcard Session

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Krishna Pakala, Boise State University; Kim M. B. Tucker, Boise State University; Samantha Schauer, Boise State University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

activities and interactions sparking the interest of the individual. • Cycle 2: Potential value: Knowledge capital. Activities and interactions can produce “knowledge capital” when the value is realized at a later date and time. • Cycle 3: Applied value: Changes in practice. Adapting and applying knowledge capital that leads to change in practice, approaches, or protocol. • Cycle 4: Realized value: Performance improvement. After applying the knowledge capital, reflection on what effects the application of knowledge capital had on the members practice is taken into consideration. • Cycle 5: Reframing value: Redefining success. Value creation is achieved when social learning causes a reconsideration

Conference Session

First-Year Programs: Design in the First Year

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Lorraine Francis, University of Minnesota, Twin Cities; David John Orser, University of Minnesota, Twin Cities; Kia Bazargan, University of Minnesota, Twin Cities; Susan Mantell, University of Minnesota, Twin Cities; Joshua M. Feinberg, University of Minnesota, Twin Cities; Russell J. Holmes, University of Minnesota, Twin Cities

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

course is to spread the more experienced studentsbetween teams. In this way, those more experienced students can help the less experiencedlearn. Figure 2 shows the flow diagram and specifications for the team projects. Students areintroduced to the project in Week 3 or 4 and challenged to think of a problem or goal statementfor a project. In this short exercise, students consider the project specifications (see Fig. 2. right)and project categories such as “Tools and Fixtures”, “3D Model or Visualization” and “HelpingOthers”. Students also reflect on their own interests and their experience so far in the course asthey think of a problem or goal statement. Further, several examples are provided to help themunderstand the elements of a well

Conference Session

First-Year Programs: Work in Progress Postcard Session

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Carol S. Gattis, University of Arkansas; Xochitl Delgado Solorzano, University of Arkansas; Don Nix, University of Arkansas; Jennie S. Popp Ph.D., University of Arkansas ; Michele Cleary, Cleary Scientific Intelligence, LLC; Wenjuo Lo, University of Arkansas; Bryan Hill, University of Arkansas; Paul D. Adams, University of Arkansas

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

Dr. Wen-Juo Lo is an Associate Professor in the Educational Statistics and Research Methodology (ESRM) program at the University of Arkansas. His research interests involve methodological issues related to analyses with a focus on psychometric methods. The recent research agenda concentrates statis- tical methods for the detection of bias in psychological measurement, especially measurement invariance on latent factor models. In addition, he also conducts research to develop effective latent variable model and instrument that reflects the factors of college students’ retention.Dr. Bryan Hill, University of Arkansas c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019

Conference Session

First-Year Programs: Deciding on a Major

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Kerry Meyers, University of Notre Dame; Victoria E. Goodrich, University of Notre Dame

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

students. At the end of the module, students completed a reflective paperthat outlined their experiences in engineering thus far and their expected major choice moving forward. Figure 1. Model of Discernment ModuleThis program structure, with a requirement to initially see all departments followed by choice events, hasalso been implemented at another Midwestern university and yielded positive outcomes. Positiveoutcomes included: (1) a higher retention rate in engineering and the STEM College and (2) a decrease inthe engineering major switches after the first-year1-2. Comparing the prior study to the current study site,there are significant institutional differences: an urban public vs. a selective private. In both

Conference Session

First-Year Programs: Deciding on a Major

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Matthew B. James P.E., Virginia Tech; Kacie Hodges P.E.; Jenny L. Lo, Virginia Tech

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

help you get where you are now? 7. Any additional comments that would be useful to a first-year engineering studentAn in-class survey was administered for a completion grade at the end of the semester to solicitfeedback and reflection about the engineering job of the day profiles that were presented.Notable questions to be explored in this paper include the following: ● Q1: How did the engineer of the day profiles affect your perception of engineering? (Likert Scale and free response) ● Q2: Did the Engineer of the Day profiles help you decide to pursue (or not to pursue) a specific discipline? (Yes/No) ● Q3: A question asking whether the profiles helped students pursue other opportunities such as membership in

Conference Session

The Best of First Year Programs: Best Paper Session

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Noah Salzman, Boise State University; Ann Delaney, Boise State University; Catherine Rose Bates, Institute for STEM & Diversity Initiatives; Donna C. Llewellyn, Boise State University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

ActivitiesWhile the program activities of Bridge to Boise State and STEM Summer Adventure (now merged intoone program under the title, RAISE) have evolved over the years, common elements have remainedimportant components of the program over time. These include peer mentoring, opportunities to connectwith STEM faculty, team and community building activities, and sessions that focus on buildingmindsets and habits linked to academic success, such as a growth mindset. The following is a summaryof the program activities from the most recent year of the RAISE program, which are reflective of, if notidentical to, the program activities from previous years of the Bridge to Boise State and STEM SummerAdventure programs.Peer MentoringFeedback from previous years

Conference Session

First-Year Programs: Work in Progress Postcard Session

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Soundouss Sassi, Mississippi State University; Abigail Clark, Ohio State University; Jane Petrie, Ohio State University ; Rachel Louis Kajfez, Ohio State University; Mahnas Jean Mohammadi-Aragh, Mississippi State University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

examine how intended student development goals for first-year engineering that are set by instructors, faculty, and administrators align with thestudent experiences as described by students.AcknowledgementsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation underGrant Nos. 1664264 and 1664266. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions orrecommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do notnecessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.References[1] R. A. Ellis, “Is U.S. Science and technology adrift,” Washington, DC: Commission on Professionals in Science and Technology., 2007[2] M. Borrego, R. Brawner, “Preparing Engineering Educators for Engineering Education

Conference Session

First-Year Programs: Wednesday Cornucopia (Educational Research)

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Michele Yatchmeneff, University of Alaska, Anchorage; Matthew E. Calhoun, University of Alaska, Anchorage

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

presentations were designed to help students to start visualizing themselvesas engineers or improve their engineering recognition and caring. Fifth, the students were alsoasked to develop cardboard chairs for their final team project. Students work together in teamsto develop the chairs and then present their chair to the class. This project was designed to helpstudents improve their engineering performance/competence, interest, creativity, and designefficacy. Lastly, students were required to complete weekly homework assignments where theypersonally reflect on topics such as their engineering interests, study plan, and any barriers theycan foresee that might prevent them from becoming an engineer. These were designed toimprove their engineering

Conference Session

First-Year Programs: Professional Skill Development

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Kathleen A. Harper, Ohio State University; Richard J. Freuler, Ohio State University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

rationale for each form. At the end of the semester, students wereasked to reflect on the strengths and weaknesses of whatever grouping technique was used intheir section. A qualitative analysis of all of these data has led to a description of the experiencefrom the perspective of the students. Further, the trends that emerged from these engineeringstudent descriptions were compared to and contrasted with the benefits described (largely byinstructors) in implementations in mathematics courses elsewhere.Course Background, Description, and SettingThe work described was situated in the first-year engineering honors program [17]. Thisprogram, which has enjoyed a rich history, typically serves between 350 and 450 students peracademic year. Almost all of

Conference Session

First-Year Programs: Work in Progress Postcard Session

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Kamau Wright, University of Hartford

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

inWeek 6, and complete specified activities related to the Guaranteed 4.0 Program, includingupdating their Bullet-point Notebooks. The activities for the day in the class mainly consisted of an instructor-led discussion,which emphasized the importance of the assignments, strategies for maximizing theirperformance, and a variety of first-year college student milestones that students might beexperiencing or expect to be experience in the coming weeks. One such milestone is: midterms,and what to do before, and after completing midterms, in regard to preparing, reflecting,improving, staying motivated whether performance is bad or good, and more. While initiatingsuch talking points, the Lead Instructor was able to listen to students

Conference Session

Bridge Programs Connecting to First-Year Engineering

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Kuldeep S. Rawat, Elizabeth City State University; Robin Renee Mangham, Elizabeth City State University; Orestes Devino Gooden, Elizabeth City State University; Elton L. Stone, Elizabeth City State University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs, Pre-College Engineering Education

-point scale. DoS Domain DoS Category DoS Scores (n=4) Average Range Activity Engagement Participation 3.25 2-4 Purposeful Activities 3.75 3-4 Engagement with STEM 3.25 3-4 STEM Knowledge and STEM Content Learning 3.5 3-4 Practices Inquiry 3.5 3-4 Reflection 3.25 2-4The classroom used at ECSU allowed informal

Conference Session

First-Year Programs: Focusing on Student Success

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Stephen Roberts, University of Florida; Fazil T. Najafi, University of Florida; Curtis R. Taylor, University of Florida

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

nationalproduct (GNP). The by-product of our unified educational opportunity for all citizens is in thenation’s economic and technological strengths. In order to increase the number of engineersneeded for our economy we must adequately prepare USP in foundational courses such as algebraII, pre-calculus, calculus and chemistry at the K-12 level. USP students must be encouraged,counselled, and prepared at the K-12 level to complete these foundational courses if they aspire topursue STEM as a major at a top tier university such as the University of Florida (or other top tieruniversity). At the university level, higher education practitioners must be committed toperforming on-going and reflective strategic planning for continuous improvement of their

Conference Session

First-Year Programs: Focusing on Student Success

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Melissa Lynn Morris, West Virginia University; Robin A. M. Hensel, West Virginia University; Joseph Dygert, West Virginia University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

Conference Session

First-Year Programs: Monday Cornucopia (Classroom Innovations)

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Joshua L. Hertz, Northeastern University; Duncan Davis, Northeastern University; Brian Patrick O'Connell, Northeastern University; Constantine Mukasa, Northeastern University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

) 0, (𝑏)The compatibility score for one team is calculated as a weighted sum of each of the attributescores and the schedule score. As previously described, each attribute score ranges between 0and 1, and the schedule score ranges roughly between 0 and 1. These values are multiplied by theinstructor’s chosen weighting factors in order to reflect their relative importance. Onto thiscompatibility score is added any prevented teammates penalty, required teammates penalty,and/or gender isolation penalty. This final sum is then normalized in order to give a score thatlies generally within the range 0 to 100. A team score can go outside this range only bybecoming negative because one or more of the penalties applies, or by going over 100