of their program [4]. Effective classroom practicescan greatly help in enhancing the retention rates of engineering students [5]. These practices canbe defined as the use of the best practices in pedagogical strategies [1], assessment to informinstruction [6], a deep understanding of the subject matter [7], and positive instructor-studentrelationships and a supportive classroom environment [8] to enhance student learning andcontribute to their success. The purpose of the study is to understand how instructors’pedagogical knowledge influences their classroom practices for teaching first-year engineeringcourses. The study is guided by the research question: How does instructors' pedagogicalknowledge influence their classroom practices for
subgroup analysis was done.Results for Research Question 1 A paired samples t-test comparing the mean sense-of-belonging change from beginningof freshman year to the end of first semester was computed for seven cohorts of students: fall2015 – fall 2021 starting semesters (see Table 1 and Figure 1 which represents the same datavisually). In addition, we reported the effect size of any statistically significant difference asCohen’s d. This effect size captures the magnitude of any difference in standard deviation units.A commonly accepted interpretation of the magnitude of Cohen’s d effect size is: small d = 0.2,medium d = 0.5, large d = 0.8 [14] which must be interpreted within the context of the study.Table 1. Mean Change in Sense of
rate is smallest for students who are calc ready in their first semester. The pass rate forcalc-ready students dropped from 62.9% under the old new sequence to 57.6% under the newsequence. Another important observation is that the pass rate for precalculus students droppedfrom 32.3% to 22.7% under the new sequence. It is concerning that the pass rate for studentsstarting in precalculus is so low and essentially equivalent to that for students starting inalgebra.In order to assess the statistical significance of the differences in pass rate between the old andnew sequences, a Z-test was used. The Z-test was chosen because we are comparing summativestatistics for a large number of samples of binary data variables, which converge to a
relationships which are difficult to be detected in small samples.Furthermore, most teamwork assessment and support tools allow instructors and researchers touse student feedback to identify students or teams that require attention so that they are notstruggling with academics, especially with the teamwork process. For example, with the help ofteamwork assessment and support tools, instructors were able to understand how team harmonyaffects the overall team performance, or how students can be clustered based on theirpersonalities and traits [4], [5]. Such benefits might not be realized if teamwork assessment andsupport tools are not used to collect a large amount of student data in class. This study utilized data collected via Tandem, a teamwork
events.Theme 3: Building Skills for Success – The transition from high school to college can bechallenging for many students. Providing students with effective individualized learningstrategies and boosting their metacognitive skills – an awareness of one’s own thought processes– has been previously identified as critical to enabling success in formal and life-long education[14][15]. These skills for success, including techniques for time management and settingpriorities, active reading, effective study aids, ways to boost motivation and perseverance, andmethods for effective cooperative learning with peers, can positively influence student successand retention within engineering programs [6][7][16]. Learning activities in the course weredesigned to
engineering techniques. His recent research focuses on the effect of high-impact practices on engineering and computer science undergraduate student outcomes around academic success and persistence.Dr. Candis S. Claiborn, Washington State University Professor Emeritus Candis Claiborn has been at Washington State University since 1991. In 2016, she returned to faculty after serving for 10 years as Dean of the Voiland College of Engineering and Archi- tecture at WSU. Prior to that, she served as interim dean and as associate dean for research and graduate programs. Dr. Claiborn received her PhD in chemical engineering from North Carolina State University in 1991. Her research interests are in engineering education
scores onbelonging in the engineering major decreased over the first year while men students’ meanscores on this measure increased during the same period. This might be attributed to the impactof women students’ experiences as non-majority students in the department. Another interestingfinding is that women Scholars’ mean scores on “I am part of engineering” were higher than mencounterparts (both Scholars and Comparison) on both the pre and the post survey. Again, ourfindings are limited by the small number of responses available when conducting gendersubgroup analyses and when looking at post survey data.This study helps us to gain insights into the women’s experience in the scholarship program,specifically related to belonging, which can help
Design Process to First-Year Students with a Project Focused on Offshore Wind EnergyAbstractThis is a complete evidence-based practice paper. In 2019, a new semester-long course projectwas developed for our university’s first-year engineering program that aimed to introducestudents to the engineering design process (EDP) in an engaging and relevant way. Students inour small undergraduate-only engineering program earn Bachelors of Science degrees inEngineering, with a specialization in civil, computer, electrical, environmental, mechanical, or acustom area. Offshore wind energy was chosen as the project topic both for its relevance to theuniversity’s coastal location and because it touches upon many of the subareas of
, curriculum, projects, 3D printing, robotics, laser, Arduino, LEGOIntroduction Students pursuing a 4-year degree in engineering at Robert Morris University arerequired to take an Introduction to Engineering course to learn about the degree and profession.It is typically completed in their first semester of the program and has no prerequisite courses.The curriculum for the course had remained largely unchanged for over a decade and following asuccessful ABET re-accreditation the author proposed updating the curriculum to introduce moreproject-based learning in the course. Working with a group of three junior engineering students,the author followed the course during the Fall semester of 2022 week by week, reviewing thecurrent content. For each
Foundations ofEngineering I at the study institution have some latitude to tailor the learning experiences in theirclassrooms, provided they align with the previously established learning outcomes and fulfillprogrammatic assessment requirements (ABET and general education) [2]. However, a commonapproach they use to helping students learn about different engineering disciplines and theircontributions to existing technology has been the Product Exploration or Product Take-apartactivity.In this activity, students are encouraged to bring small objects to the classroom that they feelcomfortable disassembling, even if they may not be able to reassemble them. Commonly broughtitems include pocket calculators, cell phones, computer mice, and toys. Instructors
Connecticut Daniel Burkey is the Associate Dean of Undergraduate Programs and the Castleman Term Professor in Engineering Innovation in the College of Engineering at the University of Connecticut. He earned his B.S. in Chemical Engineering from Lehigh University in 1998, his M.S.C.E.P and Ph.D., both in Chemical Engineering, from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 2000 an 2003, respectively, and his M.A.Ed with a focus in Research Methods, Measurement, and Evaluation from the University of Connecticut in 2023.Ms. Marina A. Creed APRN, FNP-BC, MSCN, University of Connecticut Marina Creed is an Instructor in the Department of Neurology at the University of Connecticut School of Medicine and practicing
students' misconceptions and lack of understanding about engineering. Thecurriculum's multidisciplinary nature and project-based learning (PBL) approach emphasizehands-on experience and real-world applications. The core project involves developing a roboticsystem, illustrating the integration of mechanical design, electronics, and programming, andfostering a comprehensive educational experience. The learning outcomes focus on fosteringunderstanding across the three engineering disciplines, enhancing teamwork, problem-solving,and multi-disciplinary collaboration, and exploring college success practices. Assessment resultsfrom a pilot implementation show positive trends in students' comprehension of engineeringdisciplines, academic readiness, and
students navigated their first yearon campus during different stages of the pandemic. We use a sociological lens in order toinvestigate how history and biography intersect for first-year engineering students navigatingtheir transition to college from 2019-2022 [35]. We share quantitative data at the college level tocompare outcomes related to retention and GPA among the three cohorts and assess differencesfor students involved in these programs compared to students who did not have the samesupports. We find evidence to support that despite adaptations student success programsdelivered online/remotely were able to build social capital among participants in ways that mayhave helped to buffer some of the social isolation and negative mental health
comparisons in STEM education.Miriam Marie Sanders, Texas A&M University Miriam Sanders is a PhD student studying Curriculum and Instruction with an emphasis in Mathematics Education at Texas A&M University. Through her research she seeks to address issues of equity and diversity in STEM education with a focus in mathematicsAaron E. Kidd, Texas A&M University Aaron Kidd is a doctoral candidate at Texas A&M University and the Program Coordinator for an NSF grant-funded program in the Department of Integrative Biology at Oklahoma State University. His re- search interests revolve around teacher-specific behaviors that drive science instruction and the prepara- tion of new science teachers to integrate such
disciplines of engineering, as well as undecided students. The courseintroduces students to engineering through discussion of broad topics like the definition ofengineer, engineering design, engineering ethics, professional societies, and so on. The ENGR1200 series, by contrast, is a lab course that is designed to be specific to different disciplines ofengineering: civil, mechanical, and so on. ENGR 1203 is the course at our institution for first-yearstudents who have enrolled in the civil engineering degree program.The redesign of our institution’s first-year engineering program is part of a broader trend in highereducation to develop curricula specifically for first-year engineering students [1]. This broadertrend is motivated in large part by low
Paper ID #47096Fruitful Endeavors: Continuous Peer Feedback to Develop Positive TeamDynamicsBrian Patrick O’Connell, Northeastern University Dr. O’Connell is an associate teaching professor in the First-Year Engineering program at Northeastern University. He studied at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst in 2006 then worked in industry as a Mechanical Engineer working on ruggedized submarine optronic systems. He returned to academia in 2011 at Tufts University planning to work towards more advanced R&D but fell for engineering education and educational technologies. His research now focuses on developing
Education program (NSF IUSE), three community colleges from NorthernCalifornia collaborated to increase the availability and accessibility of the engineeringcurriculum by developing resources and teaching strategies to enable small-to-medium sizedcommunity college engineering programs to support a comprehensive set of lower-divisionengineering courses. These resources were developed for use in a variety of delivery formats(e.g., fully online, online/hybrid, flipped face-to-face, etc.), providing flexibility for localcommunity colleges to leverage according to their individual needs. This paper focuses on thedevelopment and testing of the resources for an introductory Materials Science course with 3-unit lecture and 1-unit laboratory components
students as they develop self-efficacy for self-regulated learning, engineering self-efficacy, and resilience – is 360 Coaching working? 3) Is the advising provided by 30 Coaching dependent on the 360 Coach’s involvement in the first-year engineering design course?We are leveraging four validated survey instruments that support answering the first twoassessment questions. A few of the original survey questions/statements have been adaptedslightly to better align them with our engineering program. The adaptations are noted below,along with the original text that was removed or altered.To assess how well 360 Coaching provides what students want from advising we are using thesurvey of 12 essential advising functions proposed by Smith
; Rodrigues, 2020; Bodnar et al., 2015).Recent calls to increase the microelectronics workforce necessitate a systematic assessment ofintegrating microelectronics and microcontrollers into engineering programs. We need to assessthe teaching strategies and approaches taken by different engineering disciplines in thisintegration. This research employs a systematized literature review methodology to examinevarious approaches to incorporating microelectronics and microcontrollers into engineeringcurricula. The goal of this review is to identify the various methods and detail how these effortshave measured their impact on student learning, motivation, and retention (Zhu & Trowbridge,2023; Davishahl, 2024). By synthesizing findings from previous
Paper ID #46631Novice versus Experienced Near-Peer Mentors’ Facilitation of a Discussionwith a Student Avatar Facing Logistical Challenges on a Design TeamPamela S. Lottero-Perdue Ph.D., Towson University Pamela S. Lottero-Perdue, Ph.D., is Professor of Science and Engineering Education in the Department of Physics, Astronomy & Geosciences at Towson University. She has integrated engineering into courses for PreK-8 teacher candidates, developed and directed a graduate STEM program for PreK-6 teachers, and partnered with teachers to implement PreK-8 science-integrated engineering learning experiences. She has
undergraduate degree. This will beaccomplished by analyzing students’ perceptions of their own abilities to apply design thinking at theoutset of their first-year Cornerstone program, and again at the conclusion of their senior CapstoneDesign courses. The researchers embarked on this WIP upon identifying that the ABET-mapped courseobjectives and student outcomes for the first-year and senior programs were uniquely paired in focusingon the application of design thinking.First-year and senior students in a large, private R1 university are required to take design courses thathave students apply the engineering design process through an opened-ended design project,specifically, first-year Cornerstones of Engineering and senior Capstone design. Students in
Paper ID #42154Near-Peer Mentors’ Discussions with a Student Avatar Experiencing LogisticalIssues on a First-Year Design TeamDr. Pamela S. Lottero-Perdue, Towson University Pamela S. Lottero-Perdue, Ph.D., is Professor of Science and Engineering Education in the Department of Physics, Astronomy & Geosciences at Towson University. She has integrated engineering into courses for PreK-8 teacher candidates, developed and directed a graduate STEM program for PreK-6 teachers, and partnered with teachers to implement PreK-8 science-integrated engineering learning experiences. She has authored numerous engineering-focused
“significanteducational benefits” of HIPS have been shown to extend to “those from demographic groupshistorically underserved by higher education” [18], and these are the groups institutions will behoping to recruit and retain as we hit the enrollment cliff.Information and research, like that shown in the previous paragraphs, are a small sampling of thedata that inspired CSU to start the SURE program in the spring of 2019. Since that time, theSURE program has yielded stellar results, demonstrating increased retentions rates of over 7% inthe WSCOE and increased retention rates of almost 5% at CSU when compared to a WSCOEreference group. In addition, students participating in the SURE program are better able to seethemselves as an engineer, more likely to reach
” knowledge), and, (2) transfer ofthat knowledge to a new performance environment. This paper reports on the results of studentself-appraisal surveys/quizzes and provides an overall evaluation of the current and potential futureimpact of the workshop series.The stand-alone nature of this series of workshops makes it highly adaptable not only for otherengineering schools, but also for non-engineering programs that may identify the need forteamwork instruction and assessment in their curricula.1. IntroductionOrganizations worldwide have adopted teams as the default work structure; as such, identifyingwhat makes work teams effective has become the focus of both small-group and organizationalpsychology research1. In work settings that emphasize teamwork
learning experiment in live classrooms. End of the pilot program concludes this phase. Data collected throughout the duration of the pilot is analyzed at the end of the phase to investigate the effectiveness and the value of the project in improving teaching and learning outcomes. Feedback received from students is also incorporated in the final evaluation process. Share and evaluate outcomes. Results of the self-assessments from phase three are presented by each faculty member in a final report. The reports are then used to judge the educational innovation value of the various projects. Successful projects are recognized by rewarding faculty members responsible for them. During the recognition
assessments of students in their classrooms. For this paper, weanalyzed interviews to identify the entities and entity relationships in participant statements usingnatural language processing and GPT-4 as our language model. We then created a graphicalrepresentation to characterize and compare individuals’ mental models of assessment usingGraphViz.We asked the model to extract entities and their relationships from interview excerpts, usingGPT-4 and instructional prompts. We then compared the results of GPT-4 from a small portionof our data to entities and relationships that were extracted manually by one of our researchers.We found that both methods identified overlapping entity relationships but also discoveredentities and relationships not
librarians, one administrator, and two professors met to discuss how the information literacywould be integrated into the fall sections of the course. The pre- and post- test formats werekept to allow data collection for program assessment, but the lesson plans were modified toincorporate a variety of content-delivery platforms and methods.Because of the feedback from the professors last year, three sessions were presented as before,but only one during class time. The in-class session covered an introduction to information. Thesecond session was held as an “Out of Class Experience” (OCE) at the Evansdale Library.During this time the librarians showed the students how to use information tools, and studentscompleted a worksheet requiring them to use
naturally, or to continue to (and past) the scheduled end of the session.The set of guiding questions for each group included: What are the objectives of the first-year engineering programs? Why isn’t there a common set of objectives for the first year engineering courses? What would we consider to be the best practices for first year engineering program? For example, should we teach Matlab/Excel rather that introducing students to the disciplines? If students were so successful in High School, why is there so much emphasis on success? What do we mean by success? Are there any of these objectives that are hard to assess? How might we assess them? Is there anything that we think should be a best practice that isn’t
management, ethics, and professionalism. The authors havedeveloped a number of failure case studies for classroom use. Pilot studies have been carried outover several semesters in order to assess the use of failure case studies in civil engineering andengineering mechanics courses. Prior results were presented at the 2007 ASEE annual meeting,and that paper provides much of the background behind the work.1 First, case study topics are linked to specific ABET general and civil engineeringprogram criteria.2 3 Case study presentations and reading assignments have been developed tobuild student knowledge. Students are given specific homework and examination problems thatrequire application of the case studies. ABET criterion 3 defines 11 program
cost of 0.10MWhre per SWU. In centrifuge enrichment the UF6 enters small spinning canisters,which use centrifugal forces to separate the lighter U-235. The process does not requirethe large number of stages that gaseous diffusion does. When the desired 4% enrichmentis achieved the gas is sent to a fuel fabrication plant. The first step in manufacturing thefuel is to convert the UF 6 to UO2. Then the UO 2, which is a powder, is pressed, sintered,incorporated into fuel rods and assemblies and prepared for shipment to the power plant.Every 18 months one third of the fuel in the reactor is replaced. This study assumes aonce-through fuel cycle so there is no recycling (the spent fuel contains 1 w/o U-235 and0.64 w/o Pu-239). The spent fuel is