civil engineers. These presentations were spaced throughout thefirst half of the semester in ENG1100.It was during this module that the semester design project was introduced. The design projectconsisted of designing a safe snowball launcher. Students developed a management plan andtimeline for their project (using MS Visio and Word) and a general 3D concept model usingUGNX. As a class, they analyzed the elasticity of the launcher cords to determine how thespring force in the cord is related to how much the cord is stretched. This activity served toreview basic spreadsheet skills from ENG1001. At this point in ENG1100, students wereintroduced to functions using Visual Basic (VBA) Programming. To add to their spreadsheet
AC 2008-477: INCREASING STUDENT SUCCESS IN ENGINEERING ANDSCIENCE THROUGH A FRESHMAN ENRICHMENT PROGRAMAlicia Boudreaux, Louisiana Tech University Alicia Boudreaux works as the Student Success Specialist at LA Tech University's College of Engineering & Science. She advises and supports students, helping to connect them to resources across campus. She also visits with prospective students and their families about the undergraduate engineering and science programs. She has a B.S. in Mechanical Engineering from LA Tech University and an M.S. in Educational Administration from Baylor University.Kelly Crittenden, Louisiana Tech University Dr. Kelly Crittenden received his BS and PhD in
© American Society for Engineering Education, 2006 THE SHOW MUST GO ON Reflections On The Pursuit Of Engineering Through Inter- Disciplinary Design ChallengesIntroduction Several recent studies have expressed concern about the small numbers of Americansreceiving degrees in engineering and related fields relative to other countries, and have called forsharp increases in engineering enrollments and degrees. Yet, the number of high schoolgraduates choosing engineering as a major has increased only slowly and the attrition rate ofstudents in engineering programs remains alarmingly high. The success in attracting increasingnumbers of women, blacks, Hispanics, and Native Americans into
engagement were examinedin relationship to calculus success.IntroductionEngineering programs in American colleges have several core courses that engineering studentstake as prerequisites to subsequent engineering courses majors. Calculus is one of theses courses.Calculus provides the foundation for understanding higher-level science, mathematics, andengineering courses. Further, calculus is identified as a starting point in mathematics instructionfor many engineering programs. The importance of succeeding in the first year of calculusamong freshmen engineering students has been emphasized in a number of studies. Due to poorperformance in calculus among freshmen students in the last ten years, the undergraduatecalculus course has attracted an
AC 2012-4090: INTRODUCTION OF CNC MILLING TO FIRST-YEARENGINEERING STUDENTS WITH INTERESTS IN NANOTECHNOLOGYAND MICROFLUIDICSScott Michael Abernathy, Ohio State University Scott Abernathy is currently an undergraduate student studying mechanical engineering at the Ohio State University. He works for the First-year Engineering program as a Teaching Assistant and works with the nanotechnology and microfluidics design class.Barbara Elizabeth Carruthers, Ohio State University Barbara Carruthers is a graduate Teaching Assistant at the Ohio State University’s First-year Engineering program. She is currently pursuing her master’s degree in mechanical engineering.Miss Kayla Fay Presley, Ohio State UniversityMr. Paul Alan
AC 2010-1659: IMPLEMENTING PEER LED TEAM LEARNING IN GATEWAYSCIENCE AND MATHEMATICS COURSES FOR ENGINEERING MAJORSBenjamin Flores, UTEPJames Becvar, UTEPAnn Darnell, UTEPHelmut Knaust, UTEPJorge Lopez, UTEPJosefina Tinajero, UTEP Page 15.685.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2010 Implementing Peer Led Team Learning in Gateway Science and Mathematics Courses for Engineering MajorsAbstractThe large lecture format found in most introductory mathematics and science courses isgenerally not conducive to a teaching-learning process that would allow for the development ofprofessional skills such as team work, oral and written communication, and time
.” Page 24.150.5Next, the authors evaluated how word choices changed when students were asked, “What isengineering design.” Again, these questions were asked on the first day of class and on the finalexam. As Figure 2 illustrates, the largest change was an increase in the word brainstorm; asurprising increase of 2550% (2 students before and 53 after.) Brainstorming is closely related todivergent thinking, so this increase indicates an important shift in the students’ understanding ofdesign. The other words that increased in use are similar to those in Figure 1, but different intheir amount of increase. 2400.00% 1900.00% 1400.00% 900.00% 400.00% -100.00%Figure 2: Differences in Before and After Responses to "What is engineering design?"Students
Paper ID #34152Figuring ”It” Out: Informational Literacy for Problem Scoping inEngineering Design (Theory)Dr. Brianna L. Dorie, Gonzaga University Brianna L. Dorie is an Assistant Professor of Civil Engineering at Gonzaga University responsible for the implementation of the first year engineering program. Her research centers around the formation of engineering thinking and broadening participation in engineering. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021 Figuring "it" out: Informational literacy for problem scoping in
Paper ID #32882WIP: Developing a Virtual Information Literacy Training Program for aMulti-Disciplinary First-Year Engineering ProgramMr. Alexander James Carroll, Vanderbilt University Alexander J. Carroll, MSLS, AHIP, is the Librarian for STEM Research at the Vanderbilt University Libraries. Alex serves as a liaison librarian for the School of Engineering and STEM academic units within the College of Arts and Science, supporting the research of faculty and developing curriculum- integrated information literacy instruction programs for students in the sciences. Alex serves as an Assistant Editor for the Journal of the Medical
Paper ID #33743WIP: Halting Attrition in Civil Engineering Programs ThroughLower-Division Engagement Course ImplementationMs. Briceland McLaughlin, Boise State University Briceland McLaughlin is an academic advisor at Boise State University. She graduated with an M.Ed. from the University of Kansas in 2011 and has worked at higher education institutions across the country over the last decade in both student affairs and academic support roles. Briceland is interested in the intersectionality of student development theory and curriculum design.Dr. Nick Hudyma, Boise State University Nick is a professor and chair of Civil
Paper ID #33077WIP: Practical Applications for Students With Autism Spectrum Disordersin the Freshman Engineering CurriculumDeana R. Delp Ph.D., Arizona State University Deana R. Delp has a Ph.D. in electrical engineering from Arizona State University. She is a lecturer at Arizona State University for Engineering Academic and Student Affairs in the Ira A. Fulton Schools of Engineering. She is the chair of the IEEE Computational Intelligence Society Continuing Education sub- committee. She has industry experience as a systems engineer for General Dynamics Mission Systems, and as a research and development product engineer for
describe first-year engineering students’ perceptions of a seriesof modules on professional integrity implemented for the first time by the First-Year EngineeringProgram at the University of Pittsburgh in the 2018-2019 academic year. As part of the First-Year Engineering Program, students take two engineering courses: one in the fall semester andone in the spring. Three modules were implemented each semester, so that students wereexposed to the topic periodically throughout their first year in engineering. The modulesdiscussed the importance of integrity in the engineering profession and in the workplace, andconnected professional integrity expectations to academic integrity expectations.After each module, students (541 in the fall semester and
that have completedthat transition; the attrition rates for Class of 2016, Class of 2017, and Class of 2018 being 67%,50%, and 38%, respectively. This attrition can be contributed to poor performance in the math andengineering courses. The occurrence and underlying reason for attrition of Accelerate studentsmirrors the attrition trend of traditional students on Clemson University’s main campus, and morebroadly engineering programs across the United States. Significant attrition of traditional studentsoccurs between their first and second year, and is often due to struggles in math- and engineering-related courses. As the Accelerate program continues to grow and adapt, there has been a decreasein the first-to-second year attrition rate. This
Paper ID #19617Work in Progress: The Construction of a New First-Year Engineering Pro-gramDr. George D. Ricco, University of Kentucky George D. Ricco is an assistant professor of electrical and computer engineering at the University of Kentucky. He focuses his work between teaching in the first-year engineering program at UK and research in student progression. Previously, he was the KEEN Program Coordinator at Gonzaga University in the School of Engineering and Applied Science. He completed his doctorate in engineering education from Purdue University’s School of Engineering Education. Previously, he received an M.S. in
Graduates and Their Impact on Curriculum Design," J. Engr. Ed., 82(4), Oct 1993 4. R. A. Guzzo and M. W. Dickson, "Teams in organizations: recent research on performance and effectiveness," Annual Review of Psychology, vol. 47, pp. 307, 1996. 5. J. R. Katzenbach and D. K. Smith, The Wisdom of Teams: Creating the High Performance Organization. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press, 1993. 6. J. S. Byrd and J. L. Hudgkins, "Teaming in the design laboratory," Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 84, pp. 335, 1995. 7. E. Seat and S. M. Lord, "Enabling effective engineering teams: a program for teaching interaction skills," Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 88, pp. 385, 1999. 8. Personal Strength
Paper ID #23012Examining the Effectiveness of Scholars Assisting Scholars Program AmongUndergraduate Engineering StudentsDr. Lydia Yang Yang, Kansas State University Yang Lydia Yang is Assistant Professor of Quantitative Research Methodology at College of Education, Kansas State University. She received her Ph.D. in Curriculum & Instruction from Florida International University. Her research interest include quantitative research design, recruitment and retention of women in STEM fields, motivation and self-regulated learning.Dr. Bette Grauer P.E., Kansas State University Assistant Dean for Retention, Diversity, and
, 2000.[4] E. Seat, J. R. Parsons, and W. A. Poppen, “Enabling Engineering Performance Skills: A Program to Teach Communication, Leadership, and Teamwork*,” J. Eng. Educ., vol. 90, no. 1, pp. 7–12, 2001.[5] C. D. Grant and B. R. Dickson, “Personal Skills in Chemical Engineering Graduates: The Development of Skills Within Degree Programmes to Meet the Needs of Employers,” Educ. Chem. Eng., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 23–29, Jan. 2006.[6] R. M. Felder and R. Brent, “Cooperative Learning,” in Active Learning, vol. 970, 0 vols., American Chemical Society, 2007, pp. 34–53.[7] J. W. Creswell, Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. SAGE Publications, 2003.[8] P. M. Boynton and T. Greenhalgh, “Selecting
ELAskills. Statistically significant differences were found between ACT math and ELA scores, withincoming engineering students possessing greater math than ELA abilities. However, evenstudents with ELA scores 7-points lower than the mean ACT composite score performedadequately in first year engineering courses, indicating no need for a communication focusedremedial path in first year engineering.BackgroundFirst year engineering programs focus on retention of students within engineering programs,development of essential skills for engineering, and the selection of engineering majors. Incomingstudents’ math abilities as measured by ACT/SAT are often used as a threshold of acceptance intoengineering programs and are seen by some as a predictor of
often no easier. Variousengineering schools around the country struggle with a retention rate of less than 50% from freshman tosophomore year1. A report issued by the National Academies2 describes undergraduate programs inscience and engineering having some of the lowest retention rates among academic disciplines.Students drop out of engineering for multiple reasons. A significant group of students enter engineeringwith excellent high school academic credentials. Students may enter college with inflated expectations of Page 15.431.2their expected academic performance. Many students panic and question whether engineering is right
. This division assures that only those students inengineering sections of MATH 155 are engineering majors. Sections of calculus reservedspecifically for engineering majors make joint projects between the engineering and mathematicsprograms possible.Instructors from WVU’s Department of Mathematics in the Eberly College of Arts and Sciences(ECAS) and Freshman Engineering Program in the College of Engineering and MineralResources (CEMR) worked together to develop calculus-based projects that can be introduced inCEMR’s project-based Engineering Problem Solving I (ENGR 101) course. Together, the mathand engineering faculty identified calculus concepts with which MATH 155 students typicallystruggle. These concepts were targeted to be reinforced in
, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology Page 23.1192.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2013 The Effect of Required Introduction to Engineering Courses on Retention and Major SelectionAbstractStudents who matriculated in undergraduate engineering programs are studied to determine theeffects of a required introduction to engineering course on major selection. Requiring such acourse appears to affect the way the students sort themselves into majors, particularly studentswho do not declare a specific engineering major at matriculation. Such courses also seem
physics and a PhD in science education. Her research interests include physics/astronomy education, citizen science, and the integration of technology in teaching and learning. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2020 Mitigating the Fear of Failure in a STEM + Computational Thinking Program for Minority Girls (Work-in-Progress-Diversity)IntroductionThis is a work-in-progress study. The purpose of the paper is to present research on anintervention informed by the first year of the study. We are conducting an after-school program,studying an integrated STEM +Computational Thinking curriculum, in an urban, low-incomeneighborhood. Our program’s broader intention is to influence how
AC 2011-1232: INTERDISCIPLINARY STEM-BUSINESS GRADUATE CER-TIFICATE IN ENTREPRENEURSHIP PROGRAMKen Vickers, University of Arkansas Ken Vickers is a Research Professor in Physics at the University of Arkansas, and has served as Director of the interdisciplinary Microelectronics-Photonics Graduate Program since its creation in April 1998. He worked for Texas Instruments from 1977 through March 1998 in integrated circuit fabrication engineering, the last seven years as Engineering Manager of the TI Sherman IC Wafer Fab. Professor Vickers’ technical accomplishments before leaving TI included chairmanship of the Sherman Site Technical Council for six years, election to Senior Member Technical Staff, chairmanship of two
center had a major impact on students taking their first programmingsequence. Freshmen students as well as students from other classes have participated inthe PLC activities. The PLC proved to be successful for both day and evening students.The center offered walk-in hours for students as well as seminars during the lunch houron various topics. This paper discusses the impact of the center on students' learning andsuccess in their first computer programming sequence. The center can be duplicated toserve students in other disciplines.IntroductionSeveral Engineering Technology programs require a sequence of courses in computerprogramming. In particular, computer science technology, computer engineeringtechnology or information technology programs
Paper ID #27651Program Evaluation of a High School Summer Bridge Program in Chemistryand Engineering (Evaluation)Dr. Amanda Simson, The Cooper Union Amanda Simson was appointed Assistant Professor of Chemical Engineering at The Cooper Union in August 2017. Her research focuses on using heterogeneous catalysis in applications like emissions control and alternative energy technologies. Amanda received her Ph.D. from Columbia University’s Department of Earth and Environmental Engineering. After her PhD she worked on developing hydrogen production technologies for Watt Fuel Cell in Port Washington, NY. Dr. Simson is
D.Eng. student will identify a research program that is related to the field in which (s)he is either in currently or desires to be employed. The research shall develop new products, processes, or knowledge that can benefit industrial, governmental, organizational, or military entities. Appropriate research methods and statistics are covered in two required courses, which includes ENGR 820 Applied Engineering Research Methods and one 3-credit course in an approved statistics or numerical methods/analysis course (appropriate to the student’s specific research question). 3. Analyze and synthesize analytical and critical thinking within their discipline, and, where appropriate, across disciplines, building
Paper ID #19733Developing and Improving a Multi-Element First-Year Engineering Corner-stone Autonomous Robotics Design ProjectMr. David Joseph Frank, Ohio State University David J. Frank is a 4th year Computer Engineering honors student at The Ohio State University and an Graduate Teaching Assistant for the Fundamentals of Engineering for Honors program. He will graduated with his B.S.E.C.E in May 2017, and his M.S.E.C.E in May 2018.Ms. Kelly Lynn Kolotka, Ohio State University Kelly L. Kolotka is a third year Chemical Engineering honors student at The Ohio State University with a minor in Biomedical Engineering. She is
management and PhD in civil engineering. Her interests are in quantitative and qualitative research and data analysis as related to equity in education.Dr. Jacquelyn F. Sullivan, University of Colorado Boulder Jacquelyn Sullivan is founding co-director of the Engineering Plus degree program in the University of Colorado Boulder’s College of Engineering and Applied Science. She spearheaded design and launch of the Engineering GoldShirt Program to provide a unique access pathway to engineering for high potential, next tier students not admitted through the standard admissions process; this program is now being adapted at several engineering colleges. Sullivan led the founding of the Precollege division of ASEE in 2004; was
learning based on our current knowledge about student learning.TRADITIONAL APPROACH TO ENGINEERING FUNDAMENTALSA traditional engineering curriculum is very effective at developing high-level competence in theanalysis of a narrow range of systems. The traditional curriculum includes a set of fundamentalengineering courses, usually at the sophomore level, that differ for each discipline. A typical me-chanical or civil engineering program would begin with a course in mechanics, e.g. statics, as thefirst “difficult” engineering-analysis course. For electrical engineers, it would be circuit analysis,while chemical engineers would begin with mass balances. Each discipline seems to have afoundational course intended to immerse students in discipline
have identified peer adviceas more valued by students than advice from formal sources.7 Students are, in some sense, morequalified than formal sources to give advice to undergraduate science, technology, engineering,and mathematics (STEM) students. Many counselors and advisors were not STEM studentsduring their undergraduate program. Faculty, while more often STEM students asundergraduates, are likely to have been elite students, who underestimate the challenges facingthe average student.The advice expressed by our 185 interviewees, most of whom are upper division, derives fromtheir actual lived experiences, reflecting on the challenges they have faced in the context ofsuccessfully negotiating an engineering curriculum. Most perceptions of