inequities. In addition, she is interested in technology and how specific affordances can change the ways we collaborate, learn, read, and write. Teaching engineering communication allows her to apply this work as she coaches students through collaboration, design thinking, and design communication. She is part of a team of faculty innovators who originated Tandem (tandem.ai.umich.edu), a tool designed to help facilitate equitable and inclusive teamwork environments.Christopher Brooks, University of Michigan ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 Analyzing Patterns of Pre-Semester Concerns in First-Year Engineering StudentsAbstractThis complete research
problem by deciding what to focus onabout the problem. This aspect also makes teaching design difficult, especially in the first yearwhen students have completed little to none of their technical coursework. To overcome thisissue, faculty sometimes reduce the complexity by making the design problem purely technical,removing social and policy factors. However, this approach can actually make the problem moredifficult for students, by obscuring the problem context and meaning. Another way facultyaddress the issue is by reducing the ill-structuredness, providing kit-based projects in whichstudents lack opportunities to frame the problem.We sought to investigate how first-year students navigated a complex and ill-structured designchallenge, guided by
was sick, however, he did do all his work remotely so there were no issues related to that.” “He is always ready to help and learn new things. He reminds the team about what tasks need to be done.” (b) Peer comments after instructor intervention “Because I have a weakness for the Revit, I was trying to help as most as possible on presentation and the logo or engineer notebook.” “Student A worked mainly on the presentation while offering support for the Revit. He also created a few classrooms in the design” “He was willing to work but might be a little limited by his skills with Revit. However, he made sure the team milestone presentations get done in a timely manner and in relatively high quality.’Case Study 2 - Fear of ConflictsFour students
equity and inclusion, and the use of data science for training socially responsible engineers.Dr. Jennifer L Zirnheld, University at Buffalo, The State University of New YorkDr. Kevin M. BurkeDr. Julia Latorre,Prof. Carl F. Lund, University at Buffalo, The State University of New York Carl Lund earned a B.S. from Purdue University and a Ph.D. from the University of Wisconsin, both in chemical engineering. He worked at the Exxon Corporate Research Labs prior to joining the faculty of the Chemical Engineering Department at the UniversityDr. Andrew Olewnik, University at Buffalo, The State University of New York Andrew Olewnik is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Engineering Education at the Univer- sity at Buffalo
engineering specialty they want to pursue [3].Concerning methodology, some redesign efforts have been guided by significant input fromstudents, utilizing surveys or focus groups [3, 4]. Other redesign efforts have focused more oninput from faculty [1]. In the work presented in this paper, student input was primarily anecdotalor pulled from comments in student course evaluations.The motivation for redesigning the first-year experiences tends to include increasing retention,improving scalability as a program grows, reducing the number of credit hours committed to thefirst year, or a commitment to continuous improvement [1, 3, 4]. In this work, the faculty teamredesigning the sequence was primarily concerned with student success and retention while
cohort development andidentity throughout the entire first year, students in the early implementations of this programwere encouraged to take the same section of a three-credit hour, Engineering in History courseeach spring. That requirement was dropped in later years because of scheduling difficulties.All first-year engineering and computing students participate in student success, careerexploration, and professional development experiences, receive academic and student successsupport, and beginning in 2022, are advised by professional advisors (not faculty) in thecollege’s new centralized advising center. Before 2022, the AcES program director advised allAcES participants until they moved from the first-year program to their major department
culture, resources, and the different academic disciplines side-by-side with first yearstudents and equally important, gave the faculty member a built-in mentor with whom they meton a weekly basis and could ask questions and address concerns as they arose. The new facultymember had taught at a large public institution prior to joining University of the Pacific, aprivate and primarily undergraduate institution. Their observations include: Learning the culture – As a new faculty member, it is crucial to understand the context and requirements of the student population to better serve their needs. As a private, primarily undergraduate institution, University of the Pacific focuses on students who require extra support and assistance during
, understanding the consequence oftechnology, understanding how people use machines and social consciousness, as they proceededthrough their engineering programs and found that the level of interest in these issues declined.The decline was attributed to attitudes that non-technical concerns were not relevant to “real”engineering and similarly social competencies were valued less than technical skills. In addition,an emphasis on meritocracy leads to the view that social structures are fair and just, such thatthey need not be of concern for engineers.Niles et al. [3] found that even students in programs that had well-established engagement inpublic welfare had difficulty appreciating the value of non-technical skills as part of their identityas engineers
collected inputs related to Course Topics from both faculty and students. We initiated adiscussion among the RBE faculty by sharing course survey results with them soliciting theirinput. For students feedback, it was in the form of listening sessions. For this part, we specificallyaimed at finding answers to the following questions: 1) Are all necessary Topics/Skills covered inthe curriculum?, 2) Are there any gaps in the curriculum?, and 3) Are topics in the correct order?FindingsBased on the collected data, we were able to find the sources of the problem of students not beingprepared for courses in terms of programming and software engineering. Issue 1: The order inwhich Recommended Backgrounds are suggested contribute as part of the source of
? • How do PENG students describe their program experiences at a public University? • How can we redesign the PENG program to better support students? • What similarities exist between under-recruited Zipcodes in Michigan and student representation in the PENG program at a public University? These guiding questions help in examining students' needs, comfort issues, and concerns about the support provided in a PENG program and further assist higher education personnel in enhancing their office's tools and processes to better support students and use data more effectively to better track, identify, and support students. B. Abbreviations and Definitions of Technical Terms • STEM — Science Technology Engineering and
Psychology department toidentify attitudes surrounding its usage. They found a relatively wide disagreement between thetwo groups best illustrated by the 3% of students who felt extra credit should never be offeredversus 21% of the faculty surveyed who felt the same. When queried on the potential advantages,students viewed it as a second chance to make up points whereas faculty reported using it as away to motivate students to do given tasks and an opportunity to allow students to explore topicsin greater depth. Of particular note was the hostility with which many faculty responded to thissection typically citing issues such as causing students to take the required coursework lessseriously or lowering standards. A follow up study by Hill IV et al
futureeducational practices and contribute to the ongoing efforts to enhance the transition experiencefor first-year engineering undergraduates, ultimately promoting their success, well-being, and asense of belonging within the university setting.References[1] T. L. Strayhorn, College Students’ Sense of Belonging: A Key to Educational Success forAll Students, 2nd ed. New York: Routledge, 2018. doi: 10.4324/9781315297293[2] A. H. Maslow, “A Theory of Human Motivation,” 1943, [Online]. Available:https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:53326433.[3] Kelly-Ann Allen, Margaret L. Kern, Christopher S. Rozek, Dennis M. McInerney & GeorgeM. Slavich (2021) Belonging: a review of conceptual issues, an integrative framework, anddirections for future research
invested in supporting the SURE program, survey, poster fair, and celebration. • Thank you to Nicole Ross, an incredible Research Analyst in CSU’s Office of Institutional Research, Planning, & Effectiveness. Without your diligent work, the SURE program would not have grown and thrived. • Thank you to all the SURE faculty and SURE students who have participated in the SURE program; you are the life blood of the SURE program. • Thank you to the many people, both at CSU as well as the ASEE members, who reviewed and improved this paper.References[1] K. Allen, “Belonging: a review of conceptual issues, an integrative framework, and directionsfor future research,” Taylor & Francis Online, March 10, 2021
? Video Is the description of the engineering project clear? Is the need for engineers from two different engineering disciplines to Clarity and accuracy of the work collaboratively with someone from a non-engineering discipline information and content provided properly justified within the context of the engineering project? Does the video discuss possible impacts of the project on society and/or the environment? Are potential issues related to ethical and professional concerns
course. Studio pedagogy is an increasingly popular active learning technique. Thistradition of pedagogy deemphasizes faculty lecture and emphasizes student-directed projectwork. However, studio pedagogy draws heavily on instructor-initiated communication foreffective instruction. A limited body of research suggests that such communication ischallenging, and we posit that early instructors experience additional, as-of-yet unidentifiedchallenges. To better understand these communication issues, a team of four undergraduatecourse assistants and one faculty member conducted a collaborative autoethnographic study ofinstructors learning to teach in a first-year studio course. We identified the challenges the(student) instructors faced and the
credit. Given that honors students often juggle multipledemanding courses simultaneously, striking a balance between workload and academic standardsis paramount. Past iterations of this supplementary work have included additional problemsassigned only to honors students for some course material, creating a quad chart related to theshort hands-on projects, and delivering a 3-5 minute presentation related to the long hands-onclass project.In Fall 2023, the Introduction to Engineering courses have undergone extensive improvementswith regards to course content and delivery methods inspired by principles from Association ofCollege and University Educators (ACUE) training that the FEP faculty attended. ACUE trainingemphasized the importance of meeting
detailed rubrics which describe all criteria for success.These three key elements to a transparent assignment [23] were added to all graded coursematerial.In the past, rubrics in this course had always been provided, but were lacking any detail.Previous concerns that students could use the rubrics to reverse engineer the solution yieldedsignificant student stress and trained students to ask if their answers were correct instead ofpracticing techniques to evaluate and verify their own work. Following the TILT framework,rubrics with details for every point were provided for every assignment. In addition to increasedequity of the learning experience, faculty workload was reduced due to fewer emails (ex. Whydid I not receive points for X?) and
conflict as a student(Figure 2), all participants suspected a peer of not contributing as much as they should have(question A.8). Nine participants confronted this peer and reported this issue using peer-reviewprocesses like CATME. Of these nine, four participants additionally raised their concern withtheir TA or professor. One participant only reported the issue directly to their TA or professorwithout confronting the peer or using the peer-review process. Four participants recalled a timewhen they did not contribute as much as they should have; none of the participants haveexperienced what it is like to be told that they were not contributing.Participants gave a variety of plausible reasons for a student not contributing as expected(question A.9
assessing theimpact of remote learning in the spring of 2020, students and faculty discussed difficulties withclassroom engagement via online platforms and fatigue associated with spending hours a dayattending online classes [12]. Particularly for students in engineering, a lack of hands-on learningduring this period was perceived to create an experience deficit that might reverberate in lateryears. Another qualitative study followed first-year engineering students over time to understandto what extent their perceptions and experiences about online learning changed [13]. This studyfound that many anxieties about online learning remained throughout the course of thequalitative study, and that students were particularly concerned about their ability
and opportunities have arisen in recent years. The general engineeringprogram has encountered significant and ongoing enrollment growth, more than doubling in sizewhile continuing to use the same room dedicated almost 30 years ago. New universitydevelopment plans are expected to increase enrollment further, and necessitate changes inpreparation for a new planned dedicated space. The home department actively and continuouslyseeks to improve the first-year curriculum, and the leadership of the space must engage in thosediscussions and be able to adapt. Additionally, the challenges associated with COVID-19 andsubsequent ongoing supply chain issues have created the need for multiple process adjustments.In response to these challenges and
- system testing to verify correct functionality or identify design or implementation errors.MotivationElectrical circuits can be a challenging component in multidisciplinary 1st-year projects due tothe confluence of having to understand the underlying mathematics and physics, beingintroduced to new and abstract concepts, and the construction and debugging issues associatedwith breadboarding [2], [3]. Simple circuits with a few components are more manageable forstudents but are not particularly novel or inspiring in building circuit skills and understanding. Aprimary example of this is the direct connection of actuators and sensors with an Arduino orsimilar, such as the popular Sparkfun inventor kits along with their guidebook [4] that
Bello in Santiago, Chile, where currently collaborates with the Educational and Academic Inno- vation Unit, UNIDA (for its acronym in Spanish), as an instructor in active learning methodologies. Her research interest topics involve university education in STEM areas, faculty and continuing professional development, research-based methodologies, community engagement projects, evaluation tools and tech- nology, and gender issues in STEM education. https://orcid.org/0000- 0002-0383-0179 ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2023 Analysis of factors that influence the academic performance of first-year Chilean engineering studentsAbstractThis complete research paper
alreadypresented a convincing case in support of oral exams, outlining their potential to encourage deeplearning [24]–[27], promote student-faculty connection [28]–[34], develop students’ technicalspeaking skills [35], [36], [30], [37], [30], [38], and combat cheating [23], [31], [39]–[44], [34].Scaling oral exams to large-enrollment classes, however, can be prohibitively expensive in termsof time commitment, scheduling requirements, and the number of instructional assistants neededfor the examination process [28], [36], [37], [45]–[47]. As a solution to the scalability problem,we propose the merging of oral exams and peer assessment, which yields a new assessmentmodality unifying the merits of both practices. The highly scalable practice of peer
activity exposurechallenge through the implementation of new educational science procedural standards thatincorporate engineering thinking such as SEPS (Scientific and Engineering Practices Standards).The challenge is that K-12 (high school focus) is still very siloed, so a difficult roll-out [1], [2].Some colleges are implementing pre-course trainings to help incoming students better preparefor college, such as summer bridge courses and pre-course preparation sessions [3], [4], [5], [6].These tend to focus on a particular topic and typically do not explore interdisciplinary elements[7], [8].Extracurricular student organizations and clubs are assembled to foster student engagement ofspecific topics. These are often student run with limited faculty
interests include investigating first-year engineering student experiences, faculty experiences, and the research to practice cycle within first-year engineering.Laine Rumreich, The Ohio State University Laine Rumreich is a PhD student studying Computer Science and Engineering at The Ohio State University. She completed her undergraduate research thesis in the Department of Engineering Education and has been doing research in the department for six years. She has been a graduate teaching associate for two years and has taught first-year engineering and computer science courses. Her engineering education research interests are in computer science education, entrepreneurship, and first-year engineering.Ethan Cartwright, The
yearis critical to the students’ academic success; in this year they learn basic skills and establishessential networks with other students, faculty, and resources. How can we help these freshmanengineering students in this transition? We propose that freshman students can learn from theengineering design innovation process and apply it by analogy to the design of their academicpathways. There are multiple similarities between product innovation (i.e., technology) and thecontinuous academic challenges faced by the student. Engineers as designers and innovatorshave a vast and rich repository of techniques, tools, and approaches to develop new technologies,and a parallelism can be drawn between the design and innovation of a technology (e.g
emerged in 2010 [1]. Since itsintroduction, literature has used this theory to describe a student’s knowledge about highereducation influenced by faculty interactions, academic advising and counseling, programs ofstudy, and the ability to navigate university transfer policies and requirements. Yet, to date, noresearch study has synthesized and provided a comprehensive overview of the use of this theoryin empirical research to understand where and how it is being used. A better understanding oftheories supporting students’ vertical transfer from community college to four-year institutions isbecoming increasingly important as 45% of all undergraduates in the United States are enrolledat a two-year or community college institution [2], rising use of
externalizes thought, making thinking visible sothat new knowledge can be integrated with existing knowledge [4]. Although reflection haslargely been used as a tool for developing writing skills, contemporary research has explored itscontributions to other disciplines, including professional occupations such as nursing [5],teaching [6] and engineering [7].Reflection is often used by faculty as a tool to assess what students have learned; however, it hasmuch broader potential. First, reflection is an important tool for facilitating knowledge transferacross contexts. Reflective activities stimulate metacognition, a process wherein studentsarticulate how they learn and develop strategies for future learning [8]. Students who reflect ontheir learning are
ever-looming post-Great Recession “birth dearth,”calls on higher education to reconsider what “first-year” belongingness within college contextsmeans as enrollment strategies expand to include non-traditional adult learners and the focusshifts from recruiting new students to supporting current students [2].The student belonging imperative only intensifies as science, technology, engineering, and math(STEM) programs come to value the necessity of recruiting faculty and students from a widearray of backgrounds and perspectives to adequately solve the technological and social issues ofa modern society. For students of color and women, sense of belonging, or lack thereof, is aprevailing contributor to STEM interest and academic outcomes in
mentors who have “successfully demonstrated that they can succeed in college”[19]. These successful connections between peers contribute to student persistence [19].While such programs are often initiated to meet immediate student needs, such as questionsabout the curriculum, understanding of course material, etc., there are long-term effects on boththe students being served and the students doing the serving [7]. These effects include increasedcognitive development, communication skills, internal motivation, intrinsic fulfillment, strongerrelationships with faculty and staff, increased understanding of institutional policies andstructures, increased “awareness of professional and ethical issues,” and an “enhanced sense ofbelonging” [7]. Perhaps