Paper ID #47780GIFTS: Creative Reflection to Close the SemesterDr. Benjamin Goldschneider, University of Virginia Benjamin Goldschneider is an Assistant Professor of Engineering Foundations at the University of Virginia. He holds a PhD in Engineering Education from Virginia Tech, as well as a BS in Industrial Engineering from Purdue University. His research interests include students’ sense of belonging, socialization, program development, and pre-college introductions to STEM material. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2025 GIFTS: A Creative Reflection to Close the
Paper ID #48293WIP - Monarch Accelerator Program to Engineering: A Reflection on theFirst SemesterMs. Kristin Eden, Old Dominion University Kristin Eden is the Director of the Monarch Accelerator Program to Engineering/Lecturer in the Engineering Fundamentals Division.Dr. Jeffrey W. Fergus P.E., Old Dominion University Jeffrey W. Fergus received his B.S. in Metallurgical Engineering from the University of Illinois in 1985 and Ph.D. in Materials Science and Engineering from the University of Pennsylvania in 1990. After a postdoctoral appointment at the University of Notre Dame, in 1992 he joined the Materials Engineering
Paper ID #48572WIP: Reflections from a Multidisciplinary, Cohort-Based First-Year Seminarfor Low-income, Academically Talented First-Year Engineering StudentsDr. Elizabeth A Sanders, The University of Illinois at Chicago Dr. Elizabeth A. Sanders is a Postdoctoral Research Associate at University of Illinois Chicago. She holds a Ph.D in Engineering Education (Purdue University, 2024), a M.A. in Higher Education (University of Michigan, 2020), and B.S. in Chemical Engineering (University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, 2018). Her research focuses on human-centered design teaching and learning in the engineering context and
development of intercultural competence goals. The study seeks tounderstand how effectively STEM students manage teamwork, how this behavior is reflected intheir perceptions, and how these elements contribute to the development of skills that facilitateintercultural understanding.Methods:This study is focused on twenty-four first-year computer science students living in a learningcommunity at a large midwestern university. These students participated in semester-longlearning community focused on helping students develop professional skills such as teamworkand intercultural competence. As a part of the learning community students participated invarious team-based activities and were regularly asked to reflect on two primary areas: theirteamwork
uncertainty quantification to address a diverse set of problems, including reliable aircraft design and AI-assisted discovery of novel materials. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2025 Research as Teaching: On Student Mindset and Voice in a Sustained Collaborative AutoEthnography on Mathematical ModelingAbstractIn this complete research paper, we advocate for a methodology with unique researchaffordances that also serve student mindset development. Mindset is an important element ofstudent development; in particular, metacognition helps students learn more effectively and is akey component of lifelong learning. Theory on reflective practice suggests that key elements ofmetacognition are best
culminates in acapstone reflection where students synthesize their learning and apply it to a realistic conflictscenario.Learning Objectives 1. Understand different conflict styles and their impact on team dynamics. 2. Reflect on personal conflict styles and how they influence interactions. 3. Explore the concepts of trust, including types of trust and their role in building psychological safety. 4. Develop strategies to bridge differences, shift frames, and manage emotions during conflicts. 5. Apply theoretical knowledge to practical scenarios through a capstone reflection.Module ComponentsTable 2 presents the description for each section within the PIM module.Table 2: Productive conflict module outline Module Section
. Keyactivities implemented to achieve these outcomes included – 1) guest speakers, 2)engineering passport, and 3) redesigned semester project. The grading structure wasrevised with activities spread throughout the semester. Table 1 below presents the gradingcomponents for Fall 2024. Table 1: Grading components for CEE 101 Graded Component Points Class Participation & Online Forums 200 Engineering Passport (50 each) 200 Speakers Reflection (100 each) 300 Final Assessment – Poster
prompt reflection and integration of sociotechnical perspectivesinto every step of the design work students engage in, which requires students to keep thebroader impacts of their work in mind both in the course and beyond the classroom inprofessional practice. To properly understand the development and implementation of the CEQs,background on the course will first be provided.Course HistoryIn 2019, administrators at a large public mid-Atlantic university began a study of their FYEprogram to evaluate whether it was providing students with the skills and knowledge that wouldbe most useful to them in their professional careers. To do so, a survey was sent to engineeringfaculty, university alumni, and employers who had hired university graduates in
through the development and implementation of strategies geared towards increasing student sense of belonging. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2025 GIFTS: Addressing Bias in Engineering Design with a Classroom ActivityThis Great Ideas for Teaching, and Talking with, Students (GIFTS) paper presents a classroomactivity designed to address bias in engineering design and foster social responsibility amongfirst-year engineering students. Through analysis of real-world examples of bias in technology,students explore how cultural, personal, and societal factors influence engineering decisions andoutcomes. Analysis of student reflections demonstrates the activity's effectiveness
projectthat directly influences performance. With this intervention, we intended to cultivate a learningenvironment where students truly improved their ability to maturely and equitably handle a largeintegrated hands-on project. To measure the success of this initiative, the team analyzed the collectedpeer evaluations to examine the data provided by the tool and data obtained from reflective reports bothpre and post-intervention to provide comparative insight on the success of this intervention.Additionally, the paper describes the use of the software in various projects and analyzes the outcomes,offering recommendations for broader implementation. While acknowledging the complexity andnuance of team dynamics, we anticipate this research will
adaptability. Byintegrating structured coaching with hands-on prototyping activities, the "Design forManufacturing" course seeks to foster adaptive expertise, preparing students to tackle open-ended problems with confidence and ingenuity. This study aims to provide evidence-basedinsights into the effectiveness of this pedagogical approach, contributing to broader efforts inenhancing first-year engineering education.Background: Adaptive expertise, as differentiated from routine expertise, requires a balance ofefficiency and innovation [1]. Kolb’s Experiential Learning Cycle [2] offers a valuableframework for fostering this adaptability through iterative processes, emphasizing ConcreteExperience, Reflective Observation, Abstract Conceptualization, and
practices or knowledge. • Personal Reflection: Reflect on why you chose this individual and what you found most interesting or inspiring about their life and work. • References: Include all the sources you used to gather information for this report. Be sure to follow the appropriate citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago, etc.).o Submit the Report: (the end of Week 9)o Presentation: (Week 10) Prepare a brief presentation (5 minutes) summarizing your report. This presentation should highlight the most significant aspects of the figure’s life and contributions. Be ready to answer questions from your peers.For this assignment, a list of historical figures across many engineering disciplines is provided,including Issac Newton
SLO 3, and a range of audiences (from Engr PLO 1) would encompass multiple perspectives. Engr PLO 2 comprises the foundational skills of the liberal arts from FYC SLO 4. rogram objectives are utilized to assess the progress made by students, they provide aPstandardized goal for student learning achievement. These objectives led the instructor to utilize indirect assessment statements which helped students reflect on their growth, and direct assessment short-answer questions which helped students reflect on their values and experiences. Both the statements and questions (presented in the Methods of Assessment section of this paper) individually correlate with the learning objectives. Figure 3
complete evidence-based practice study was for the instructors, and authors, tobetter understand students’ confidence levels and sense of belonging across demographicsincluding gender, first generation status, ethnicity and class standing in an introductorymechanical design course. Undergraduates (N = 93) enrolled in the course in spring 2024 wereassigned weekly reflection assignments, graded for on-time completion. A subset of items,repeated each week, asked students to rate their ability to apply a set engineering skills beingtaught in the course that included computer-aided design, use of hands-on making tools, abilityto apply engineering theory to a design project, ability to explain design ideas to other students,and ability to apply
engineering students [1], [2], asthis new generation of engineers will need to solve multi-faceted, complex social, technical, andethical issues using interdisciplinary, collaborative, data-driven, and systematic approaches [3],[4].Background and Theoretical FrameworksTo solve these complex, ill-defined social problems, students must first learn the processes anddevelop frameworks for concepts and procedures behind solving well-defined technical problems[5]. One crucial component of problem-solving is metacognition, the process of reflecting onone’s own learning processes including planning, monitoring, and evaluating that learning [6],[7], [8]. Metacognition, commonly referred to as “thinking about thinking,” is essential forself-directed learning
lower.Computational tools were most valued for the manufacturing sector, reflecting the sector'sdependency on technology-driven solutions. Statistical data analysis and understandingmathematical language were also important, with slightly less emphasis placed on estimationtechniques and the engineering design process.In the Transportation sector, employers valued applying the engineering design process most,followed by understanding mathematical language and estimation techniques. Computationaltools and statistical analysis were rated lower.The Services sector emphasized applying the engineering design process as the most criticalskill, with mathematical problem-solving and computational tools closely following. Statisticaldata analysis and estimation
intervention to scaffold knowledgeorganization. To succeed academically, engineering students must develop a deep conceptualunderstanding of course topics and then apply this learning to solve complex problems. Whileexperts know how to organize their knowledge, students often need support reflecting on thecontent and their learning. In this study, students in an over 500-person first-year engineeringcourse were provided with a worksheet called the “Synthesis Sheet” that prompted them toorganize declarative, procedural, conditional, and contextual knowledge on a topic. Weinvestigated the efficacy of this intervention by examining student opinions of the intervention andhow their resource engagement influenced their grades throughout the term. We found
, professional, engagement, and civic. To achieve these goals, the task force employed asystematic model of audit, evaluate, consult, redesign, and implement, ensuring a thorough andcollaborative approach to the curriculum overhaul.Redesign FrameworkTask force approach As illustrated in Fig. 1, The task force was invited to adopt a multi-phase approach to itswork, encompassing auditing, evaluation, consultation, design (or redesign), and implementationplanning. Each phase is elaborated further below. Figure 1. Approach for review process of the task force• Audit: Conduct an examination of the current state of the FYS courses. Collect, review, categorize, and summarize information about the courses.• Evaluate: Reflect on
chosen because it’s a simple and common itemthat is easy to prototype with found materials, but could be easily substituted with an alternative.During the 75-minute classroom session, after an introduction by the instructor, the interactiveactivity is divided into four active phases: (1) Question Brainstorm, (2) Client Interview, (3)Artifact Generation, and (4) Class Wide Sharing/Reflection.1. Question BrainstormStudents begin by brainstorming interview questions for a client, with generative AI assistingthem in refining those questions. As a human-centered design task, students are encouraged todesign questions that will help them gain the perspective, problems, preferences, and needs of aclient. This exercise immediately highlights how
. Prior to full deployment, the survey underwent a face validityassessment with a faculty panel to ensure clarity and relevance. All participants in the study weretraditional undergraduate students, primarily aged 18-19, with the majority being domesticstudents. Approximately 15-20% of the respondents were international students. Unfortunately,socioeconomic background information was not available at the individual level.The surveys were administered in two stages: a pre-survey (AI use and student perceptionssurvey; deployed four weeks into the semester) conducted at the beginning of the semester, priorto an AI-focused lecture, and a post-survey (AI use reflection survey) conducted three to fiveweeks after the lecture. The lecture provided
background and experience prior to the course, spanning from lowexperience, reflecting minimal exposure to programming and robotics, to high experience,indicating strong foundational knowledge and confidence in these areas from beforehand.From these axes, four distinct categories of learners emerged: Self Reliant, Pioneering,Overwhelmed and Engaged learner. The first category, Self-Reliant Learners, includes studentswith high prior technical experience but low willingness to engage with AI. These students aredescribed as autonomous and confident in their coding and robotic abilities, preferring to rely ontheir own skills rather than embracing generative AI as a resource. This category refers tostudents who prefer to use the chatbots sparingly
end of the term. These concept maps wereanalyzed using standard metrics of depth and connectivity, and they were compared using anevaluation rubric to identify the types of concepts that were expected to be included, based ondefinitions of equitable infrastructure that are commonly endorsed by professionals.The paper offers insights into the efficacy of different approaches to integrating equitableinfrastructure concepts into first-year courses, reflections on student outcomes, and suggestionsfor faculty to effectively and efficiently introduce students to these topics. Our goal in sharingthis work is to inspire discussion within the engineering community about how faculty anddepartments across the U.S. can address equity and infrastructure
. Preliminary results reveal aspectrum of understanding, ranging from predominately narrow task-oriented views to lesscommon broader evaluative and reflective approaches. The findings underscore the necessity ofintegrating explicit critical thinking instruction into engineering curricula to addressmisconceptions and strengthen this vital competency. This study aims to inform engineeringeducators and administrators of where first-year students are starting with this understandingwith the intention to illicit strategies for improvement and contributions to the development ofpedagogy to educate engineers who can navigate complex societal and technical challenges.IntroductionThis complete research paper discusses critical thinking in the context of first
introduce students to foundational engineeringmindsets. It emphasizes belonging through culture, the course, the engineering discipline, and theuniversity itself. This paper discusses the pedagogical approach, activities, assessment methods,and future evaluation plans, along with reflections from the instructor team andrecommendations for similar curriculum initiatives. Our institution is an open-access, research-intensive HSI on the US-Mexico border withapproximately 84% Hispanic students. Anyone with a high school diploma or GED who appliesto the university at the undergraduate level is accepted, creating opportunities for all while alsoposing unique challenges in the classroom. For instance, many of our students enter engineeringwith
solutions through iterativetesting, and reflect on their experiences to deepen their understanding of the design process.The broader aim of this initiative is to prepare students for professional engineeringenvironments by instilling a mindset of systems thinking, adaptability and resilience. Bynavigating challenges such as structural instability, shifting weights, and wave dynamics,students develop problem-solving skills that extend beyond the classroom. This approach alignswith the growing emphasis on experiential learning in engineering education, which seeks tocombine theoretical knowledge with practical, hands-on experimentation.By integrating iterative design [2] and reflective learning [3], the “Will It Float?” designchallenge serves as a
highlybeneficial to building core design skills [7].Peer mentorship can be a very valuable augmentation in engineering education, offering severalbenefits to both mentors and mentees. It is considered an effective pedagogical approach toenhance student engagement, learning outcomes, and retention in engineering education.Lunsford et al. [8] highlight the benefits of peer mentoring in cultivating a sense of belongingand improving students' confidence in their abilities within STEM disciplines, including first-generation university students. Similarly, Colvin and Ashman [9] discuss the dual benefit of peermentorship, where both mentors and mentees gain valuable learning experiences throughknowledge sharing and reflective practice.The integration of
Biological Engineering Phoenix Man Asian FYE Aerospace Reese Woman African American FYE Chemical Skyler Woman Caucasian FYE Industrial Note: FYE = First-year Engineering. Dakota and Oakley are transfer students into engineeringWe were fortunate that the diversity of participants reflected the broader population of first-yearengineering students. Each participant took part in a semi-structured interview, which lastedbetween 10 and 30 minutes depending on the depth of their responses. To acknowledge theirtime and effort, participants were compensated with a $20 cash payment upon completing
understand how to analyze GenAI generated code to see if it will achieve your goal? 4. How did you know if you could or could not “trust” the solutions provided by GenAI? 5. What role does GenAI have in acquiring knowledge or helping in an area you feel less skilled during the engineering design process? And, how did the second part of the project where you were allowed to use GenAI compare to the first part where you were not allowed to use GenAI?At the end of the challenge, when students presented their final parade float mechanisms, theywere also required to reflect and share what they learned about employing GenAI in their designprocess. More details of the assignment are available in Appendix A.Activity 2: Problem
review report to the Canvas Learning Management System for the instructors to review. Quinncia is provided to all students at Auburn University.c) Career Fair Visit and Reflection (Objective 1 & 2) – Based on past comments from students, many students are nervous or struggle with communicating/selling themselves to potential employers, and this is often the first time some students are applying for a position. To help prepare students for future career and internship/co-op fairs, we required students to attend one of the engineering fairs on campus during the semester. As a first-year engineering student, many companies do not have open positions, or the students don't have the fundamental engineering skills/knowledge to
, effective learning strategies, and mindfulness practices.Through the final project, students apply systems engineering principles to synthesize coursetopics into meaningful groupings, reflecting on their personal and academic growth.The study addresses three research questions: (1) Which course topics do students identify asmost influential and useful for their future? (2) What common grouping strategies do studentsuse, and do these align with the course framework? (3) Does the systems engineering approachfoster unique metacognitive insights? A qualitative analysis of student submissions from the Fall2024 cohort reveals that time management and rest are identified as the most impactful skills.Grouping strategies ranged from simple categories