Survey Of First Year Programs

Abstract

To assess the current status of first year programs, two surveys of first year programs in engineering were circulated through the ASEE Freshman Programs Division (FPD) listserv. The first survey was sponsored by the FPD, and the second survey was sponsored by the NAE Center for the Advancement of Scholarship on Engineering Education (CASEE). Participation in the surveys involved 91 institutions in the FPD survey and 49 institutions in the CASEE survey.The FPD survey focused on program structure, staffing, and how advising and tutoring is accomplished. Of the participating institutions, approximately two-thirds of the institutions were about evenly grouped in one of four categories: programs conducted by a formally recognized department or division, by someone on the dean's staff, by a responsible faculty member or group of faculty members in addition to their teaching or research duties, and programs conducted in individual engineering disciplines. The remainder of the programs had unique features that did not neatly correspond with one of the other categories. The paper also presents survey data on how faculty, graduate and undergraduate students, and others are used in teaching, advising, and tutoring; advising services and how these are handled; and availability and administration of tutoring services.The CASEE survey focused on the content of the curriculum and the teaching methods. An estimated 20% of the entering students were not ready to study engineering (range 0 to 90%). The overwhelming weakness reported was mathematics. Twelve institutions reported some effort to integrate courses and one institution reported all courses were integrated. Honors programs of some sort were conducted by 67% and bridge and/or retention programs by 88%. The curriculum appears to be fairly standardized. Only the engineering courses had extensive professional activities such as socially relevant examples, interpersonal skills, leadership skills, and teamwork. Most of the engineering design courses include hands-on projects.Data from the combined surveys provide a broad picture of the current status of first-year engineering programs. Survey results should serve as a valuable reference for engineering educators who are establishing, modifying, or evaluating a first-year program.

The Evolution of a First-Year Engineering Transfer Program: 1995 - 2010

“…However, the students devote a tremendous amount of time to these activities and it is difficult to gauge whether or not this is detrimental to their grades. Examination of the literature regarding first year programs indicates that this activity is an essential part of an engineering education 10 .…”

Teaching Bioengineering To Freshmen At Ucsd

“…This need is well-established, and arises out of the need to satisfy student curiosity about the bioengineering discipline, to provide students with information about the department, and to instill in students the beginnings of much-needed technical survival skills. These first year courses can improve academic performance, stimulate interest and improve retention, and better prepare students for future coursework [1][2][3] . It is important that students acquire the qualities that prepare them to be successful engineers in the changing workplace, including the ability to work on and communicate with members of a multidisciplinary and professional team [4][5][6][7] .…”

Longitudinal Memos Investigating First-year Engineering Pathways

“…As of 2013, the majority of incoming engineering students (either by freshman or transfer status) progress through First-Year Engineering (FYE) courses [1]. These FYE courses are intended to provide engineering students with the basic skills needed to succeed in higher level courses and an early introduction to the engineering discipline [2], [3]. Institutions with FYE courses or programs (i.e., multiple FYE courses in a sequence) create these courses in the way they best see fit to help their students succeed.…”