Asee peer logo

The Wright State Model for Engineering Mathematics Education: A Longitudinal Study of Student Perception Data

Download Paper |

Conference

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Location

Indianapolis, Indiana

Publication Date

June 15, 2014

Start Date

June 15, 2014

End Date

June 18, 2014

ISSN

2153-5965

Conference Session

NSF Grantees’ Poster Session

Tagged Division

Division Experimentation & Lab-Oriented Studies

Tagged Topic

NSF Grantees Poster Session

Page Count

11

Page Numbers

24.1258.1 - 24.1258.11

DOI

10.18260/1-2--23191

Permanent URL

https://peer.asee.org/23191

Download Count

181

Request a correction

Paper Authors

biography

Nathan W. Klingbeil Wright State University

visit author page

Nathan Klingbeil is a Professor of Mechanical Engineering and Dean of the College of Engineering and Computer Science at Wright State University. He is the lead PI for Wright State’s National Model for Engineering Mathematics Education, which has been supported by both NSF STEP Type 1 and CCLI Phase 3 awards. He has received numerous awards for his work in engineering education, and was named the 2005 Ohio Professor of the Year by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching and Council for Advancement and Support of Education (CASE).

visit author page

biography

Anthony Bourne Wright State University

visit author page

Tony Bourne is the Director of Enrollment Management for the Wright State University College of Engineering and Computer Science. He is a Wright State alumnus were he received a BA in Economics and completed his PhD in Engineering Spring 2014. He also holds an MPA from Walden University. His graduate research focused on interventions that increase student retention in open enrollment schools like Wright State. Tony worked several years in workforce development and education outside Wright State starting there in 2007, when he was hired as an enrollment adviser for the Department of Electrical Engineering; he later served as the Assistant to the Chair. He then transitioned to the Dean’s Office and served as the data analyst and co-op coordinator for the college before transitioning to his current position.

visit author page

Download Paper |

Abstract

The Wright State Model for Engineering Mathematics Education: A Longitudinal Study of Student Perception DataAbstractThe inability of incoming students to advance past the traditional first-year calculus sequence is aprimary cause of attrition in engineering programs across the country. As a result, this paper willsummarize an NSF funded initiative at Wright State University to redefine the way engineeringmathematics is taught, with the goal of increasing student retention, motivation and success inengineering.The Wright State model begins with the development of a novel first-year engineeringmathematics course, EGR 101 “Introductory Mathematics for Engineering Applications.”Taught by engineering faculty, the course includes lecture, laboratory and recitation components.Using an application-oriented, hands-on approach, the course addresses only the salient mathtopics actually used in core engineering courses. These include the traditional physics,engineering mechanics, electric circuits and computer programming sequences. The EGR 101course replaces traditional math prerequisite requirements for the above core courses, so thatstudents can advance in the curriculum without first completing a traditional first-year calculussequence. The Wright State model concludes with a more just-in-time structuring of the requiredmath sequence, in concert with college and ABET requirements. The result has shifted thetraditional emphasis on math prerequisite requirements to an emphasis on engineeringmotivation for math.The Wright State model was first implemented in Fall of 2004, and its effect on studentretention, motivation and success in engineering has since been widely reported. The 2007introduction of EGR 100/199 as a precursor to EGR 101 for initially underprepared students hasfurther strengthened the approach, and has made the core engineering curriculum accessible toincoming students across the entire range of ACT math scores. As part of an NSF CCLI Phase 3initiative, various aspects of the approach are now being piloted by 15 institutions across thecountry (primarily university, but also at the community college and K-12 levels). Theseinstitutions represent strategic pockets of interest in some of our nation's most STEM criticalregions, including Ohio, Michigan, Texas, Oklahoma, California, Maryland and Virginia. Thedissemination component of the project has resulted in the addition of numerous unfundedcollaborators, and the approach is now under consideration by at least two dozen institutionsacross the country.Last year’s paper included results of a longitudinal study of program impacts at Wright StateUniversity, including student performance in calculus, student performance in core engineeringcourses, and ultimate graduation rates. The current paper will provide a longitudinal analysis ofstudent perception data, as measured by end-of-course surveys. In particular, the extent to whichincreases in student motivation and perceived chance of success in future math and engineeringcourses correlate to the previously reported increases in student performance and ultimategraduation rates will be investigated.

Klingbeil, N. W., & Bourne, A. (2014, June), The Wright State Model for Engineering Mathematics Education: A Longitudinal Study of Student Perception Data Paper presented at 2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Indianapolis, Indiana. 10.18260/1-2--23191

ASEE holds the copyright on this document. It may be read by the public free of charge. Authors may archive their work on personal websites or in institutional repositories with the following citation: © 2014 American Society for Engineering Education. Other scholars may excerpt or quote from these materials with the same citation. When excerpting or quoting from Conference Proceedings, authors should, in addition to noting the ASEE copyright, list all the original authors and their institutions and name the host city of the conference. - Last updated April 1, 2015