Paper ID #39695Integration of ethics in sustainability in a first-year design courseDr. Benjamin B. Wheatley, Bucknell University Benjamin Wheatley was awarded a B.Sc. degree in Engineering from Trinity College (Hartford, CT, USA) in 2011 and a Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering from Colorado State University (Fort Collins, CO, USA) in 2017. He is currently an Assistant Professor in the Department of Mechanical Engineering at Bucknell University. He runs the Mechanics and Modeling of Orthopaedic Tissues Lab and his pedagogical interests include first year engineering, computational analysis, and design.Prof. Katsuyuki
Massachusetts with an M.Ed. in Stu- dent Personnel Administration and has a Bachelors degree in Communication from Mansfield University in Pennsylvania.Kellie ScofieldMrs. Jennifer Saltsgiver, The Pennsylvania State University Engineering Advising Center within the College ofEngineering Jennifer Saltsgiver is the Assistant Director of the Engineering Advising Center at The Pennsylvania State University, University Park campus. She obtained her Masters degree in Education from Millersville University and her B.S. from DeSales University.Dr. Christine B. Masters, The Pennsylvania State University Christine Masters is the Assistant Dean for Academic Support and Global Programs and a Teaching Professor in the Engineering Science
of effects onstudent performance across disciplines and education levels,” Educ Res Rev, 2020.[17] J. O'Flaherty, C. Phillips, “The use of flipped classrooms in higher education: A scopingreview,” The Internet and Higher Education, 25, pp. 85-95, 2015.[18] C. Miranda, Crash course de AntroDiseño: Herramientas Aplicadas para la InnovaciónTemprana, Ediciones UC, 2019.[19] B. Honeycutt, J. Garrett. (2013). “The flipped approach to a learner-centered class,”Available at https://www.magnapubs.com[20] K. Chua, and M. Islam, “The hybrid Project-Based Learning–Flipped Classroom: A designproject module redesigned to foster learning and engagement,” International Journal ofMechanical Engineering Education, 49(4), pp. 289–315, 2021. DOI:10.1177
resubmission of work and flexible deadlines,” in 2003 GSW, 2021. [3] M. L. Amyx, K. B. Hastings, E. J. Reynolds, J. A. Weakley, S. Dinkel, and B. Patzel, “Management and treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder on college campuses,” Journal of Psychosocial Nursing and Mental Health Services, vol. 53, no. 11, pp. 46–51, 2015. [4] C. Kuimelis, “The deadline dilemma: when it comes to course assignments, how much flexibility is too much?” Nov 2022. [Online]. Available: https://www.chronicle.com/article/the-deadline-dilemma [5] D. Thierauf, “Feeling better: A year without deadlines,” Nineteenth-Century Gender Studies, vol. 17, no. 1, 2021. [6] M. Schroeder, E. Makarenko, and K. Warren, “Introducing a late bank in online
’ family members, particularly when it comes to college expenditures.However, many of these students are about to experience a significant transformation in their lives, thismeans that they are close to completing an academic degree and obtaining their first professional position,and their financial responsibilities will change considerably. a) Personal Expenditures b) College Expenditures 100% 100% 80% 80% 65
engineeringthinking and engineering design in addition to the tools to succeed in their new college environment. Inthe late 2000s, providing students just exploring the possibility of pursuing an engineering degree wasdeemed appropriate with an adjusted version of the first-year engineering seminar. This version wascomparable but differed in depth and rigor. The two versions of the seminar were for (a) acceptedengineering and (b) intended engineering students.The intended group made up approximately 35%-40% of the first-year engineering cohort. Thispercentage of the first-year cohort remained consistent since 2016; however, it was a more diverse groupin terms of race/ethnicity and first-generation status than that of the accepted students consisting of
successfulin their social integration, (b) more confident in stepping out of their comfort zones, (c) fostershigher critical thinking skills, and (d) be a more open-minded and inclusive person. As such,transformative learning readiness could be considered an important student characteristic toconsider while determining the effectiveness of a summer bridge program, thus, improving theretention of first-year students.ConclusionSummer Bridge Programs participants are recruited from a diverse range of prior experiences,familial and cultural values, as well as unique career and educational aspirations andmotivations. By acknowledging and incorporating these varied backgrounds, the transformativelearning framework accounted for the distinct experiences of
engagement was assessed by observing student participation in hands-on group activitiesin the course. Student learning outcomes were assessed by reviewing student understanding ofthe material presented in the course. Student satisfaction was assessed by evaluating students’feedback regarding the course. Student feedback data was collected for several hands-on groupactivities and curricular components of the course. The data was analyzed and assessed toevaluate the effectiveness of the course. The findings of the evaluation are presented anddiscussed in the results section.V.2-Data AnalysisStudent demographics and survey results are presented in appendix B. A cohort of 18 first-yearengineering students were surveyed regarding several areas of the
course materials are dull and uninteresting, I manage to keep working until I finishPeer Learning- beliefs about learning regarding working with peers (3) 26. When working on something for this course, I often try to explain the material to a classmate or a friend 27. I try to work with other students from this class to complete the course assignments 28. When working on something for this course, I often set aside time to discuss the course material with a group of students from the class 13 References[1] B. Beatty, Hybrid-Flexible Course Design. EdTech Books, 2019. Accessed: Feb. 13
mentorship programbegan in Fall 2019 and has grown to include the following layers: (a) first-year students whoreceive mentorship, (b) sophomore- and junior-level students who serve as mentors (all of whomreceived mentorship during their first year), (c) junior- and senior-level students who serve aslead mentors who design the program for that academic year (including content, group meetings,service projects, meeting schedules, etc.), (d) a graduate student who mentors and supervises thelead mentors, and (e) a faculty member who oversees the overall program, provides generalguidance, and advises all the students. We will describe ways in which the participating studentshave made meaning of their experience in the program, highlighting three key
. References[1] T. Kantanis, “The role of social transition in students’: adjustment to the first-year of university,” Journal of Institutional Research, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 100-110, 2000.[2] B. Tabuenca, W. Greller, and D. Verpoorten, “Mind the gap: smoothing the transition to higher education fostering time management skills,” Universal Access in the Information Society, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 367-379, June 2022. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-021-00833-z.[3] A. Häfner, A. Stock, and V. Oberst, “Decreasing students’ stress through time management training: An intervention study,” European journal of psychology of education, vol. 30, no, 1 pp. 81-94, March 2015. Available: https://www.jstor.org/stable
Annual Conference & Exposition, Columbus, Ohio. 10.18260/1-2--27552[5] Robinson, B. S., & Hawkins, N., & Lewis, J. E., & Foreman, J. C. (2019, June), Creation, Development, and Delivery of a New Interactive First-Year Introduction to Engineering Course Paper presented at 2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Tampa, Florida. 10.18260/1-2-- 32564[6] M. Jimenez, L. Guillemard, S. Bartolomei, O.M. Suarez, A. Santiago, N. Santiago, C. Lopez, P. Quintero, and N. Cardona, WIP: Impacting Students from Economically Disadvantaged Groups in an Engineering Career Pathway, In Proc. of 2020 ASEE Virtual Conference and Exposition – ASEEVC 2020, Hosted by Univ. of Maryland, June 22-26, 2020[7] UPRM Office of
College Bridge. Available: TexasCollegeBridge.org.[4] UTSA Summer Bridge Program. Available: https://ceid.utsa.edu/ceid-summer-bridge-program/.[5] L. M. Yingling. “Evaluating an academic bridge program using a mixed methods approach,”.Graduate Theses and Dissertations. Available: https://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd/2739.[6] R. Brooks, R. Lightfoot, and S. Thomas. “The power of the pre-course survey for courselaunch, addressing concerns, and developing community,” in proceedings of the 2022 ASEEGulf-Southwest Conference, Prairie View, Texas, March 16-18, 2022.[7] Texas Developmental Summer Bridge Study. Available: https://www.mdrc.org/project/texas-developmental-summer-bridge-study#overview retrieved 1/7/2023.[8] B. Grace-Odeleye, and J. Santiago
the host (Nina) and all students (Ciara, Jordan, and Stephanie) forall participants’ discussions during this study. This sim has been certified by Mursion®, is a co-author of this study, and is a member of the engineering education community.Post-Simulation SurveyAfter completing the simulation session, all twelve participants completed the post-simulationsurvey, which is shown in Appendix B. This instrument was used to gather data on theparticipants’ reflections on the one-on-one discussions and team dynamics; and perceptions ofthe authenticity of the scenario and realism of the avatars, ease or difficulty of using thetechnology, and value of the scenario as a TA training experience. The survey contained a blockof questions for TAs to
who do not have the prerequisite courses must complete thembefore enrolling in engineering classes. In this study, we use Social Cognitive Career Theory(SCCT) framework and Identity Development framework to investigate whether theserelationships differ between (a) students who entered as first-year students with the prerequisitesto immediately begin taking engineering course work (on-track students) or (b) students whowere delayed in beginning their engineering coursework (off-track students). Specifically, weexamine the persistent intentions and engineering identity development for the two groups ofstudents. To address our research questions, we employ Hierarchical Linear Models (HLM) inwhich 280 engineering students (n =152 on-track, n= 128
, and B. Bogue, “Leaving engineering: A multi-year single institution study,” J. Eng. Educ., vol. 101, no. 1, pp. 6–27, 2012, doi: 10.1002/j.2168- 9830.2012.tb00039.x.[9] R. Campbell-Montalvo et al., “How stereotypes and relationships influence women and underrepresented minority students’ fit in engineering,” J. Res. Sci. Teach., vol. 59, no. 4, pp. 656–692, 2022, doi: 10.1002/tea.21740.[10] D. S. Yeager et al., “Teaching a lay theory before college narrows achievement gaps at scale,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., vol. 113, no. 24, pp. E3341–E3348, Jun. 2016, doi: 10.1073/pnas.1524360113.[11] R. Stevens, K. O’Connor, L. Garrison, A. Jocuns, and D. M. Amos, “Becoming an engineer: Toward a three dimensional view of
Paper ID #37951The Grand Challenges Scholars Program Research Experience: A GreatOpportunity to Cultivate Belonging in a Community of PracticeDr. Olgha Bassam Qaqish, North Carolina State University at Raleigh Olgha B. Qaqish, Ph.D. is an engineering educator and researcher, who has experience working with students at all levels in science, math, engineering, and technology (STEM). Dr. Qaqish is an author of a mathematics textbook: Algebra Essentials.Chloe Grace Hincher, North Carolina State University Chloe Hincher is an undergraduate pursuing a B.S. in Biomedical and Health Sciences Engineering con- centrating in
and higher studentsatisfaction. Future efforts will seek to measure outcomes more systematically though surveysadministered in students’ senior year and comparative writing assessments.AcknowledgementThis work is supported by NSF S-STEM #1833983.References[1] B. Pepin, R. Biehler and G. Gueudet, “Mathematics in Engineering Education: a Review of the Recent Literature with a View towards Innovative Practices,” International Journal of Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education, vol. 7, (2), pp. 163-188, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40753-021-00139-8[2] J. L. Craig, N. Lerner and M. Poe, “Innovation Across the Curriculum: Three Case Studies in Teaching Science and Engineering Communication,” IEEE
arediscussed.1. Introduction1.1 Overview and Scope of the Interest in Engineering StudyResearchers in Engineering Education at J. B. Speed School of Engineering at the University ofLouisville (UofL) are in the preliminary stages of a multi-year study aimed at exploring theeffectiveness of a formal, makerspace-based course in increasing engineering retention amongfirst-year undergraduate, engineering students. Specifically, the study explores the impact of theinterest-in-engineering (IIE) construct on engineering student retention by examining howstudents’ experiences in a formal makerspace-based course can influence their interests in coursefeatures and engineering in general. The aforementioned makerspace course is titled EngineeringMethods, Tools
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
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
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
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