An official website of the United States government
This complete evidence-based practice paper discusses the strategies and results of an introduction to mechanics course, designed to prepare students for introductory-level physics and other fundamental courses in engineering, such as statics, strength of materials, and dynamics. The course was developed to address historically high failure (DFW) rates in the physics courses and is part of a set of interventions implemented to support student success in a college of engineering and computer science. The course focuses on providing in-depth understanding of Newton’s Laws of motion, free-body diagrams, and linear and projectile motion. Because it focuses on a limited number of competencies, it is possible to spend more time on inquiry-based activities and in-class discussions. The course framework was designed considering the Ebbinghaus’ Forgetting Curve, to provide students with learning opportunities in 6-day cycles: (i) day 1: a pre-class learning activity (reading or video) and a quiz; (ii) day 2: in-class Kahoot low-stakes quiz with discussion, a short lecture with embedded time for problem-solving and discussion, and in-class activities (labs, group projects); (iii) day 4: homework due two days after the class; (iv) day 6: homework self-reflection (autopsy based on provided solutions) two days after homework is due. The assessment of course performance is based on the well-characterized force concept inventory (FCI) exam that is administered before the intro to mechanics course and both before and after the Physics I course; and on student performance (grades) in Physics and Statics courses. Results from the FCI pre-test show that students who took the introduction to mechanics course (treatment group) started the physics course with a much better understanding of force concepts than other students in the course. The FCI post-test shows better normalized gain for the treatment group, compared to other students, which is also aligned with student performance in the course. Additionally, student performance is significantly better in statics, with 25% DWF rate compared to 50% for the other students. In summary, the framework of the course, which focuses on providing students with in-depth understanding of force concepts, has led to better learning and performance in Physics I, but importantly it has also helped students achieve better performance in the Statics course, the first fundamental course in civil and mechanical engineering programs.
more »
« less
This content will become publicly available on April 11, 2026
Preparations in Writing an Engineering Education Grant
At California State Polytechnic University, Pomona (Cal Poly Pomona, CPP), two gatekeeper courses for the undergraduate students in the Civil Engineering program have been identified as Statics and Mechanics of Materials. Our university’s Civil Engineering Department is the largest undergraduate CE Department in the nation with approximately 1,600 students, graduating 15% of California’s Civil Engineers. Identifying sources of students’ struggles and proposing effective interventions to support students’ success is crucial. As these two gatekeeper courses serve as prerequisites to many engineering courses, low performance in these courses contributes to a large dropout rate, delayed graduation, and continued poor performance in subsequent courses. To understand students’ struggles, historical data between Fall 2018 to Spring 2022 was examined, including: (a) failure rates for the gatekeeper courses, (b) achievement gaps (the difference between under-represented minority students (URM) and non-URM students), and (c) the correlation between students’ grades in the gatekeeper courses compared to their upper division engineering courses. A comprehensive literature review was conducted to identify proven best practices for improving student performance in STEM disciplines. The literature highlights the effectiveness of targeted interventions, as follows: (1) prepare all students for success in the gatekeeper courses and close the achievement gaps, through a Summer Bridge Program, (2) improve the students’ performance in Statics, Mechanics of Materials, and subsequent courses, and reduce Time-to-Degree, and (3) address variability in teaching between all instructors through training workshops. This paper provides a review of interventions utilized to write a proposal to request funding to agencies such as National Science Foundation and offers actionable insights for educators seeking to reduce failure rates, close achievement gaps, and standardize instructional quality across courses.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2318158
- PAR ID:
- 10615989
- Publisher / Repository:
- American Society of Engineering Education
- Date Published:
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
This project supports the success of undergraduate engineering students through coordinated design of curricula across STEM course sequences. The Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, Evaluation (ADDIE) framework and backward design are being used to develop guides for instructors to align learning outcomes, assessments, and instructional materials in a physics – engineering mechanics course sequence. The approach relies on the analysis of student learning outcomes in each course, identification of interdependent learning outcomes, and development of skills hierarchies in the form of visual learning maps. The learning maps are used to illustrate the knowledge required and built upon throughout the course sequence. This study will assess the effectiveness of a course redesign intervention, which uses visual learning maps and backward design concepts, to guide instructors within a common course sequence to align learning outcomes and assessments. If successful, the intervention is expected to improve students’ primary learning and knowledge retention, as well as persistence and success in the degree. The study will compare academic performance among Mechanical Engineering B.S., Environmental Engineering B.S., and Civil Engineering B.S. students who begin a Physics for Engineers – Statics – Dynamics course prior to the intervention (control) and after the intervention (treatment). During control and treatment terms, students’ primary learning in individual courses will be assessed using established concept inventories. Retention of knowledge from pre-requisite courses will be tracked using pre-identified problem sets (quizzes, exams) specifically associated with interdependent learning outcomes in the Statics and Dynamics courses. Students’ primary learning and knowledge retention in the sequence will be related to longer term student success outcomes, including retention and graduation. The poster will show the results of the research team’s first year of work, including an analysis of current course materials, learning maps for each course, identification of interdependent learning outcomes, example guiding materials and templates for instructors, and preliminary student performance data from the control cohort.more » « less
-
The literature in engineering education and higher education has examined the implications of course-taking patterns on student development and success. However, little work has analyzed the trajectories of students who need to retake courses in the curriculum, especially those deemed to be fundamental to a student’s program of study, or the sequences of courses. Sequence analysis in R was used to leverage historical transcript data from institutional research at a large, public, land-grant university to visualize student trajectories within the individual courses – with attention to those who re-enrolled in courses – and the pathways students took through a sequence of courses. This investigation considered students enrolled in introductory mechanics courses that are foundational for several engineering majors: Statics, Dynamics, and Strength of Materials (also called Mechanics of Deformable Bodies). This paper presents alluvial diagrams of the course-taking sequences and transition matrices between the different possible grades received upon subsequent attempts for the Mechanics core courses to demonstrate how visualizing students’ paths through sequences of classes by leveraging institutional data can identify patterns that might warrant programs to reconsider their curricular policies.more » « less
-
In the U.S., approximately 20% of graduating engineering students receive their university degree after transferring from a community college. Because the percentage of transfer students enrolled in California universities is higher than the national average, in 2016, the California State University (CSU) System launched the Graduation Initiative (GI) 2025 to raise graduation rates for transfer students. The CSU GI 2025 set goals to increase the two-year transfer graduation rate to 45% and the four-year transfer graduation rate to 85% by 2025 across all 23 CSU campuses. What has yet to be discussed extensively is which factors affect the transfer students’ success and its associated impact. This paper identified the critical success factors (CSFs) for transfer students’ success with the survey responses by transfer students in the Department of Civil Engineering at California State Polytechnic University, Pomona (Cal Poly Pomona). Identifying the CSFs is essential as sociocultural, academic, and environmental factors significantly affect transfer students' academic performance. The author composed a series of questions that fall into sociocultural, academic, and environmental factors (this survey was approved by the CPP IRB 23-003). A total of 41 transfer students responded to the survey, and the author identified CSFs for transfer students as 1) a sense of belonging, 2) networking with faculty, staff, and peers, and 3) advising for career development and available resources from the university. The identified factors should be addressed when the university develops a new program for transfer students.more » « less
-
Interventions are often deployed in different populations and varying contexts with a “one-size fits all approach.” In this poster, we underline the importance of mindfully adapting social psychological interventions for specific contexts and populations (Yeager & Walton, 2011). Without careful tweaks to contextualize some interventions, uncontextualized interventions may not be as successful. For instance, we report a study testing (uncontextualized) a social psychological intervention (values affirmation) at Cal Poly Pomona, which did not replicate significant findings for closing achievement gaps among underrepresented minorities and first-generation students. The intervention may not have resonated within the Cal Poly Pomona’s context and population of predominately Hispanic and Latinx students. We will discuss lessons learned and delineate an iterative intervention design and contextualizing methodology that may augment intervention success and exemplify our approach through our work contextualizing the Social Belonging intervention (Walton, Murphy, Logel, & Yeager, 2017) to more adequately address the needs of Cal Poly Pomona’s Hispanic and Latinx population.more » « less
