Search for: All records

Previous research has demonstrated a link between prior knowledge and student success in engineering courses. However, while course-to-course relations exist, researchers have paid insufficient attention to internal course performance development. This study aims to address this gap—designed to quantify and thus extract meaningful insights—by examining a fundamental engineering course, Statics, from three perspectives: (1) progressive learning reflected in performance retention throughout the course; (2) critical topics and their influence on students’ performance progression; and (3) student active participation as a surrogate measure of progressive learning. By analyzing data collected from 222 students over five semesters, this study draws insights on student in-course progressive learning. The results show that early learning had significant implications in building a foundation in progressive learning throughout the semester. Additionally, insufficient knowledge on certain topics can hinder student learning progression more than others, which eventually leads to course failure. Finally, student participation is a pathway to enhance learning and achieve excellent course performance. The presented analysis approach provides educators with a mechanism for diagnosing and devising strategies to address conceptual lapses for STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) courses, especially where progressive learning is essential. 

Against a backdrop of calls for increased access and participation in science, technology, engineering and mathematics, Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs) in the United States have emerged as critical access points for Latina/o/x and other Students of Color. Federal grants can become important levers for building institutional capacity for broadening participation in STEM and transforming HSIs toward better serving Students of Color, specifically as it relates to curricula and pedagogy. In this study, we focus on the engineering faculty at an HSI who are participants in a National Science Foundation-funded, equity-focused professional development program. Operationalizing Bonilla-Silva’s color-evasive racial ideology framework, we use content analysis techniques to explore how engineering faculty discuss race and racism as part of the professional development experience. First, we find that engineering faculty largely rely on color-evasive racial frameworks (i.e., abstract liberalism, minimization of racism) when describing their motivations for participating in the program. Moreover, we find that engineering faculty responses depict a range of surprise and familiarity when reflecting on issues of race and racism. Finally, regardless of prior exposure to module concepts, at the end of the program, the majority of action projects reflect a recognition of race and racism as important. 

Across the country, less than two-thirds of engineering students persist and earn a degree in engineering. A considerable amount of research on the topic has been conducted, leading to a few key ideas on why students leave engineering. In particular, disinterest in the curriculum, a limited sense of belonging, perception of inadequate academic ability, and disconnect between learning style and instruction mode are some reasons that students depart engineering. Consequently, many first-year programs aim to address one or more of these issues. The ABC program at XXX seeks to improve undergraduate civil engineering and construction management education, as well as increase retention and graduation by specifically focusing on students and curriculum in the first two years of the civil & environmental engineering and construction management (CEEC/CM) programs. Retention and graduation rates are on the lower side of national averages; therefore, faculty at the institution are taking the lead and making changes within the department. One aspect of the program is community cohesion building (CCB), where first-year students create connections, engage in community and engineering design projects, and gain exposure to CEEC/CM professions. Specific objectives are to increase the sense of learning community among students and between students and faculty, as well as increase retention in the first two years. Through biweekly meetings, participants in CCB build connections with freshman CEEC/CM peers, upper level CEEC/CM undergraduate students, CEEC graduate students, and CEEC/CM faculty. Participants also engage in the engineering design process and compete in a national engineering design challenge geared toward freshman and sophomore students. This paper describes the first one-and-a-half years of CCB implementation of a five-year grant. We present the program structure, challenges, changes, and successes. This information should prove useful to other institutions who are in the process of implementing new first-year programs, especially for institutions who have similar characteristics (i.e., urban setting, commuter school, highly diverse, high proportion of first generation students). Program evaluation focuses on the following items related to CCB objectives: 1) increase in sense of belonging as measured by an increase in social networks (tool: student survey), and 2) increase in CEEC/CM retention between freshman/sophomore and sophomore/junior years (tool: institutional data). 

In engineering, students’ completion of prerequisites indicates an understanding of fundamental knowledge. Recent studies have shown a significant relationship between student performance and prior knowledge. Weak knowledge retention from prerequisite coursework can present challenges in progressive learning. This study investigates the relationship between prior knowledge and students’ performance over a few courses of Statics. Statistics has been considered as the subject of interest since it is the introductory engineering course upon which many subsequent engineering courses rely, including many engineering analysis and design courses. The prior knowledge was determined based on the quantitative and qualitative preparedness. A quiz set was designed to assess quantitative preparedness. The qualitative preparedness was assessed using a survey asking students’ subjective opinions about their preparedness at the beginning of the semester. Student performance was later quantified through final course grades. Each set of data were assigned three categories for grouping purposes to reflect preparedness: 1) high preparedness: 85% or higher score, 2) medium preparedness: between 60% and 85%, and 3) weak preparedness: 60% or lower. Pearson correlation coefficient and T-test was conducted on 129 students for linear regression and differences in means. The analysis revealed a non-significant correlation between the qualitative preparedness and final scores (p-value = 0.29). The data revealed that students underestimated their understanding of the prerequisites for the class, since the quantitative preparedness scores were relatively higher than the qualitative preparedness scores. This can be partially understood by the time gap between when prerequisites were taken and when the course under investigation was taken. Students may have felt less confident at first but were able to pick up the required knowledge quickly. A moderately significant correlation between students’ quantitative preparedness and course performance was observed (p -value < 0.05). Students with high preparedness showed > 80% final scores, with a few exceptions; students with weak preparedness also showed relatively high final scores. However, most of the less prepared students made significant efforts to overcome their weaknesses through continuous communication and follow-up with the instructor. Despite these efforts, these students could not obtain higher than 90% as final scores, which indicates that level of preparedness reflects academic excellence. Overall, this study highlights the role of prior knowledge in achieving academic excellence for engineering. The study is useful to Civil Engineering instructors to understand the role of students’ previous knowledge in their understanding of difficult engineering concepts.