<5 5-7ResultsValue of Personal PerspectiveThe personal perspective has three main components: psychological safety, teaminterdependence, and team satisfaction. The psychological safety survey was administered duringPeer Evaluation 1. Table 3 shows two examples of the student ratings on the psychologicalsafety of their teams. According to the CATME guideline, the students who receive peer ratingof less than 4.71, would need faculty’s attention. A common approach is to set up a one-on-onemeeting with the student, allow the students to explain the situation in detail, and makeappropriate suggestions to the students. For example, for Student B, choose “Slightly Inaccurate”in “People on this team reject others for
steps as outlined by the work of Borrego, Foster, and Froyd [19]on systematic literature reviews in engineering education. The steps include (a) identifyingresearch questions, (b) defining inclusion criteria, and (c) finding and cataloging sources withfour crucial review stages as suggested by the PRISMA flowchart [20].a.) Identifying Research QuestionWe aim to explore an overarching question: How has experiential learning been implementedwithin undergraduate engineering education for the last 25 years (1995-2020) that might informadvances in first-year engineering education?The PICO (population-intervention-comparison-outcome) framework from the National Institutefor Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) [21] (Table 2) was used to clarify
model for “studying diverse transferstudents and organizational contexts.” In addition to the individual elements identified here,several articles also acknowledge the organizational and institutional factor aspects of transferstudent capital [21], [24]–[26]. Primary factors and constructs that comprise transfer student capital were first proposedby Laanan and are consistently identified throughout literature. The original four factorsincluded: (a) student background and motivations for transfer, (b) community collegeexperiences which included social campus activities and course learning, (c) transfer capitalwhich includes perceptions of the transfer process advising, learning, and study skills, and (d)four-year university experiences
self-efficacy is understood to be driving self-perceptions and eventually performance in those tasks. For instance, self-concept in calculus (i.e., a domain) can be expressed as “I am able to understand and follow along the calculus classes”, and self-efficacy in calculus (i.e., task performance) can be expressed by “I am confident I can score at least a B in the upcoming test”.The above definitions for both constructs are adapted from previous research and validating orverifying them is not within the scope of this project. This study agrees with previous findings[7], [44], [45], [46], that state self-concept is a prime predictor for favorable academic outcomesand well-being as a student. Self-efficacy, although crucial for an individual’s
designed to enhance any of the three dimensions.II.4.A. Resume Writing and Mock InterviewIt usually only takes 6-8 seconds for recruiters to decide whether an applicant will be given aninterview or not [31], so the resume must represent the applicant well. However, resumes are noteasy to write and are not often taught in engineering classrooms. The ESS provides students withtraining to write good resumes that will get them the interview. After students complete aresume, students are asked to volunteer for a mock interview in front of the class. The entireclass is introduced to the STAR (Situation, Task, Action, Result) method of the behavioralinterview [32] and is also given tips on technical interviews.II.4.B. Idea ProjectThe "Idea Project" is a
4.3 4.7 4.7 2533-HIR A1 5.0 4.7 4.7 4.7 4.7 (b) Peer ratings after instructor intervention 2533-HIR A1 4.3 5.0 4.7 4.3 4.3 2533-HIR A1 5.0 5.0 4.7 5.0 5.0 2533-HIR A1 4.7 5.0 4.7 4.7 4.7Student C realized that his team performance really depends on individual contributions, and hewould try his best effort to play the role, which was thought to be insignificant by himself. InPeer Evaluation II, Student C commented, “Student A worked
the remainder of this paper wediscuss the action research process we undertook to identify an instructional challenge (assessingteam performance), the solution our CoP developed (the design habits rubric), our experiencesimplementing this assessment tool, and our analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of this tool.We present two of the multiple versions of this assessment instrument to highlight the iterativeand methodological process undertaken.Practical Implementation Details and DiscussionHistory of Rubric ImplementationThe ENES100 instructional teaching team created a working group during the spring of 2019with three goals: a) more closely align the course activities and assessments with the courselearning outcomes, b) reward student
in a First-Year Design Course," in 2020 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access, 2020.[4] A. Phillips, K. M. Kecskemety, and D. A. Delaine, "First-year Engineering Teaching Assistant Training: Examining Different Training Models and Teaching Assistant Empowerment," in 2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, 2018.[5] L. B. Wheeler, C. P. Clark, and C. M. Grisham, "Transforming a Traditional Laboratory to an Inquiry-Based Course: Importance of Training TAs when Redesigning a Curriculum," Journal of Chemical Education, vol. 94, no. 8, pp. 1019-1026, 2017/08/08 2017.[6] C. Robinson and J. Collofello, "Utilizing undergraduate teaching assistants in active learning environments," in 2012
been created for this paper on the Engineering Unleashed website operated by KEEN [31].This card provides instructional materials for the Jim’s Donut Shop Assignment with all of thematerials mentioned in this paper, including the rubric, examples of student work, the surveyquestions, etc. These materials can be freely downloaded, reviewed, adopted, and if desiredmodified, by anyone for use in their courses under the Creative Commons CC BY-NC license[32].References[1] B. A. Becker and K. Quille, “50 Years of CS1 at SIGCSE: A review of the evolution of introductory programming education research,” in Proc.50th ACM Tech. Symp. Comput. Sci. Educ. (SIGCSE '19), pp. 338– 344, doi: 10.1145/3287324.3287432.[2] N. B. Dale, “Most
center. Figure 4. Circuits used in the system. a) Analog circuit in the testing center. b) Digital circuit controlling the conveyor belt.The overall functionality process is depicted through a sequence of strategic positions and sensorinteractions, as outlined below: 1. Initiation: The robot arm, mounted on a linear rail, moves to the Home Position for calibration. After the calibration is completed, the robot slides to the Start Position (P1). 2. Picking a bulb up: Bulbs are placed in a student-designed 3D-printed holder, shown in Figure 3When sensor S1 detects a light bulb in the Bulb Docking Area, the robot slides to the P2 position and moves the arm griper over to the Bulb Docking Area (P3) to
CriticalReflection from students in order to further our understanding and promote our goal ofcultivating reflective engineers.This work was funded by the National Science Foundation under EEC- 2022271. Any opinions,findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of theauthor(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.References[1] J. A. Turns, B. Sattler, K. Yasuhara, J. L. Borgford-Parnell, and C. J. Atman, “Integrating Reflection into Engineering Education,” presented at the 2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Jun. 2014, p. 24.776.1-24.776.16. Accessed: Oct. 26, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://peer.asee.org/integrating-reflection-into-engineering-education[2] J
[1] J.R. McCusker, "Introducing First Year Students to Externally Collaborative InterdisciplinaryDesign", Proceedings of the 7th First Year Engineering Experience, Roanoke, VA, 2015.[2] B. Hubbard, "Understanding the Impact of a First-year Engineering Program onUndergraduate Student Persistence in Engineering," Ph.D. dissertation, College of Education,University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky, 2022.[3] P. J.A.C Van der Zanden, E. Denessen, A. H.N. Cillessen, and P. C. Meijer, "Domains andpredictors of first-year student success: A systematic review," Educational Research Review,vol. 23, pp. 57-77, 2018.[4] S. J. Krause, J. A. Middleton, E. Judson, J. Ernzen, K. R. Beeley, and Y. C. Chen, "Factorsimpacting retention and success of
claim that the resource you found is quality. Criteria Evidence/ discussion C Currency The timeliness of the information R Relevance The importance of the information for your needs A Authority The source of the information A Accuracy The reliability, truthfulness and correctness of the content P Purpose The reason the information existsYou may want to reference what the librarian showed us:https://libguides.library.cpp.edu/c.php?g=962200&p=7216748Sample IEEE assessment questions 1- Which is the proper format? A) ."[13] B) .[13]" C) [13]." D) "[13]. 2- How should your reference list be ordered? A) In the order they are referenced in the paper B) Chronologically
- identify as a woman with Hispanic ethnicity, or “Latinas,” are of particularinterest in this study due to their underrepresentation in doctoral engineering programs, even atan R1 Hispanic serving institution.The research study is guided by the following two research questions: 1. To what extent do the following explain variance in research persistence intentions: (a) research self-efficacy, (b) engineering research identity, (c) perceived cultural compatibility? 2. Do Latinas’ intentions to pursue research opportunities differ from their peers?Experimental MethodsThis study involved designing and creating a survey instrument that was administered to first-year engineering students. We selected first year students because we were
engineering projects.The design process used by the course, illustrated in Figure 2, was developed to be genericenough to apply to any engineering discipline. It consists of three design phases, each with theirown output document. (a) (b) Figure 2: The ENGGEN 115 Design Process is generic enough to apply to any engineering discipline (a). The messy and iterative nature of design is illustrated through additional arrows, and the scopes of the two design projects identified in (b). - The Problem Definition phase encourages background research, stakeholder assessments, and deep understanding of the problem beyond the original problem statement. This phase
Paper ID #36790Peer oral exams: A learner-centered authentic assessment approachscalable to large classesMarko V. Lubarda, University of California, San Diego Marko V. Lubarda is an Assistant Teaching Professor in the Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering at the University of California, San Diego. He teaches mechanics, materials science, design, computational analysis, and engineering mathematics courses, and has co-authored the undergraduate textbook Intermediate Solid Mechanics (Cambridge University Press, 2020). He is dedicated to engi- neering pedagogy and enriching students’ learning experiences through
Teacher Education , vol. 53, no. 2, 2002.[4] J. O. &. C. B. Jeanne M. Hughes, "The Power of Storytelling to Facilitate Human Connection and Learning," IMPACT: The Journal of the Center, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 18-26, 2022.[5] J. Davishahl, "Centering Social Justice in Engineering: A new course model for first year engineering education," in American Society of Engineering Education Annual Conference, Baltimore, MD, 2023.[6] O. Hargie, Skilled Interpersonal Communication, London: Routledge, 2011.[7] C. M. &. M. Poston, "Self-Disclosure and Interpersonal Communication," in Exploring Communicaiton in the Real World, College of DuPage Digital Press, 2020.
further enrich the educational experience and maximize thebenefits of LinkedIn Learning Pathways for all students.References[1] Galbraith, A., & Schluterman, H., & Massey, L., & Crisel, B., & Rainwater, C. (2022, August), Exploring the relationship between initial mathematics course in college and engineering graduation rates Paper presented at 2022 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Minneapolis, MN. 10.18260/1-2--41507[2] Massey, L. B., & Galbraith, A. L. (2021, November), Retaining Over-Prepared Students in a Common First-Year Engineering Program Paper presented at 2021 ASEE Midwest Section Conference, Virtual. 10.18260/1-2-1130.1153-38334[3] https://learning.linkedin.com/for-higher
Paper ID #38303Centering Social Justice in Engineering: A New Course Model forFirst-year Engineering EducationProf. Jill Davishahl, Western Washington University Jill Davishahl is Assistant Professor and First Year Programs Director in the Engineering + Design depart- ment at Western Washington University. Jill’s teaching, service, and research activities focus on enhancing the first -year student experience by providing the foundational technical skills, student engagement op- portunities, and professional skill development necessary to improve success in the major. Her current research focuses on creating inclusive and
that form of analysis was possible.Grade Distribution AnalysisComparison of grade distributions for UNIV 1201 and GEEN 1201 during the three years inwhich GEEN 1201 existed was completed to determine whether there was a difference inacademic performance. There were adequate cumulative counts of students to ensure that theimpact of variance would be minimized and to arrive at general patterns as grades for nearly 450GEEN 1201 students and 4000 UNIV 1201 students were considered, counts sufficient todecrease the impact of variability and random fluctuations. A summary of the results appears inTable 4. Table 4 Comparison of Grade Distributions: UNIV 1201 to GEEN 1201 Course n A B C D
-7795.2010.00725.x[7] M. Y. Ahn and H. H. Davis, “Sense of belonging as an indicator of social capital,” Int. J.Sociol. Soc. Policy, vol. 40, no. 7/8, pp. 627–642, Jan. 2020, doi: 10.1108/IJSSP-12-2019-0258.[8] De La Garza, B. (2019). Experiences of college students in a first-year seminar course (OrderNo. 22584104). Available from ProQuest Central; ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.(2300629507). Retrieved fromttps://proxy1.library.jhu.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/dissertations-theses/experiences-college-students-first-year-seminar/docview/2300629507/se-2[9] First Year seminars. Office of the Provost. (n.d.). https://provost.jhu.edu/education/second-commission-on-undergraduate-education/cue2-implementation-progress/first-year-seminars
choose to do so.References[1] J. E. Mills and D. F. Treagust, "Engineering education—Is problem-based or project-based learning the answer," Australasian journal of engineering education, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 2-16, 2003.[2] M. Quezada-Espinoza, A. Dominguez, and G. Zavala. "How Difficult are Simple Electrical Circuit Conceptions? New Findings." European Journal of Educational Research 12.3 (2023).[3] P.V. Engelhardt, R.J. Beichner; Students’ understanding of direct current resistive electrical circuits. Am. J. Phys. 1 January 2004; 72 (1): 98–115.[4] Sparkfun Inventor’s Kit (SIK) Guide: http//sparkfun.com/SIKguide (accessed Feb 8, 2024).[5] R. Jain, K. Sheppard, E. McGrath, and B. Gallois (2009, June), “Promoting Systems Thinking In
; Development, vol. 41, no. 6, pp. 2020-2033, 2022, doi: 10.1080/07294360.2021.1945547.[4] P. Dwyer, “The neurodiversity approach(es): What are they and what do they mean?” Human Development, vol. 66, pp. 73-92, 2022, doi: 10.1159/000523723.[5] N. Doyle, “Neurodiversity at work: a biopsychosocial model and the impact on working adults,” British Medical Bulletin, vol. 135, pp. 108-125, 2020, doi: 10.1093/bmb/ldaa021.[6] B. Mirfin-Veitch, N. Jalota, and L. Schmidt, “Responding to neurodiversity in the education context: An integrative review of the literature,” 56 pp., Dunedin: Donald Beasley Institute, 2020.[7] K. Gillespie-Lynch, D. Bublitz, A. Donachie, V. Wong, P.J. Brooks, and J.D’Onofrio, “’For a long time our voices have been
teamwork experiencesof underrepresented engineering students, there is reason to believe that positive effects of thiswork could extend to all students. A further area of study could be an investigation into howthese resources and activities affect various demographic groups differently.AcknowledgmentWe would like to thank the Maclin Community Connections Grant Program for providingfunding to support this project.References [1] “Employed persons by detailed occupation, sex, race, and Hispanic or Latino ethnicity,” U.S.Bureau of Labor Statistics. Retrieved February 10, 2023, fromhttps://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat11.htm.[2] R. Fry, B. Kennedy, and C. Funk, “STEM Jobs See Uneven Progress in Increasing Gender,Racial and Ethnic Diversity,” Pew Research
, doi: 10.5539/elt.v5n9p78.19. C. Schau, N. Mattern, M. Zeilik, K. W. Teague, and R. J. Weber, “Select-and-Fill-in Concept Map Scores as a Measure of Students’ Connected Understanding of Science,” http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/00131640121971112, vol. 61, no. 1, pp. 136–158, Feb. 2001, doi: 10.1177/00131640121971112.20. E. Cartwright, M. E. Ita, and K. M. Kecskemety, “Analyzing Various Scoring Methods for Fill-In Concept Maps,” ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings, Aug. 2022, doi: 10.18260/1-2--41498.21. J. D. Novak, D. B. Gowin, and J. B. Kahle, Learning How to Learn. Cambridge University Press, 1984. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139173469.22. M. A. Ruiz-Primo, “On the Use Of Concept Maps As An Assessment Tool in
perceptions, thestudents might connect it to their engineering identity in any of these three ways. Path A, theinterest path, is the potential that a student may be interested in the specific empathic skills,enjoy that work, and/or want to learn more about empathy in engineering. Path B, theperformance/competence path, is the potential that they may feel that they performed well duringthe empathetic communication exercises and are competent in the material. Path C, therecognition path, students may feel that they are recognized as an empathetic person by theirrelatives, peers, or by their instructors during the lessons debriefs and exercises. This frameworkgrounds this proposed research in two previously developed frameworks, Empathy inEngineering
century skills in engineeringstudents. The Journal of Engineering Education, 26(1), 38-49.7. Lloyd, B., & Palmer, S. (2000). A systems approach to the engineering workforce.Proceedings of the First International Conference on Systems Thinking in Management,Geelong, Australia.8. Lingard, R., & Barkataki, S. (2011, October). Teaching teamwork in engineering andcomputer science. In 2011 Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) (pp. F1C-1). IEEE.9. Ercan, M. F., & Khan, R. (2017, December). Teamwork as a fundamental skill for engineeringgraduates. In 2017 IEEE 6th International Conference on Teaching, Assessment, and Learningfor Engineering (TALE) (pp. 24-28). IEEE.10. Martinez, M. L., Romero, G., Marquez, J. J., & Perez, J. M. (2010
-CollegeRelationship, and Alumni Support,” Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, vol. 10, no. 3,pp. 21–44, May 2001, doi: https://doi.org/10.1300/j050v10n03_02.[3] S. Gaier, “Alumni Satisfaction with Their Undergraduate Academic Experience and theImpact on Alumni Giving and Participation,” International Journal of Educational Advancement,vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 279–288, Aug. 2005, doi: https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.ijea.2140220.[4] Hoyt, J. E., & Winn, B. A. (2004, Spring). Understanding retention and college studentbodies: Differences between drop-outs, stop-outs, opt-outs, and transfer-outs. NASPA Journal,41(3), 395-417[5] Melguizo, T., Kienzl, G. S., & Alfonso, M. (2011). Comparing the educational attainment ofcommunity college transfer students
ratings reduced by nearly 50%, indicatingthat fewer students did not participate in the project. This study indicates that scaffolding teamassignments helps first-year engineering students with teamwork.References 1. D. Woods, R. Felder, A. Rugarcia, and J. Stice, “The future of engineering education III. Developing critical skills,” Chemical Engineering Education, vol. 34(2), pp. 108-117, 2000. 2. M. Prince, “Does active learning work? A review of the research,” Journal of Engineering Education, pp. 223-231, July 2001. 3. K. Smith, “Cooperative learning: effective teamwork for engineering classrooms,” Frontiers in Education Conference, session 2b5, pp. 13-18, 1995. 4. B. Oakley, R. Felder, R. Brent, and I. Elhajj
Paper ID #40209Evaluation of Undergraduate Staff Experiences and Infrastructure in aFirst-Year Engineering MakerspaceDr. Benjamin Daniel Chambers, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Dr. Ben Chambers is a Collegiate Assistant Professor in the Department of Engineering Education at Virginia Tech, and Director of the Frith First Year Makers program. His research focuses on academic makerspaces and creativity based pedagogies. He also has an interest in the built environment as a tool for teaching at the nexus of biology and engineering. He earned his graduate degrees from Virginia Tech, including an M.S. Civil