Gateway To Technology

One of the critical challenges in recruiting and retaining students in engineering and engineering technology is overcoming the hurdle of time spent in developmental courses. Many of the students who express interest in technological careers find that they must address deficiencies in reading, English, or mathematics before beginning a technological program. During this process many students are diverted from their original academic goal by the difficulties encountered in developmental courses that are designed for technical students. Students may also lose interest by not experiencing hands-on engineering technology. St. Louis Community College at Florissant Valley is addressing this problem through its Gateway To Technology Program (GTTP). The GTTP is one of the three components of the Gateway to Manufacturing Excellence project funded by the National Science Foundation through the Advanced Technological Education program The GTTP is a one-semester integrated curriculum that prepares a cohort of students for immediate entry into one of several engineering technology programs offered at the college. This course would typically combine College Orientation, Engineering Technology Orientation, Developmental Reading, Developmental English, Intermediate Algebra, and Technology Applications providing the student with 14 credit hours of academic work. The GTTP is team taught by faculty from Engineering/Technology, mathematics, reading, and English departments. The integrated design of the coursework provides reinforcement across disciplines for the student who begins working immediately on real world problems while developing academic success skills. Since students enroll as a cohort, they benefit from convenient scheduling and consistent class enrollment. Resources from academic advising and counseling are also included to minimize attrition. The challenge in creating this program is that the structure is outside of the typical structure for courses, enrollment and faculty load calculations. This paper discusses the rationale, benefits, and process for developing this new program. Introduction Student success has received considerable attention during this time1. Administrators and researchers in colleges and universities have increasingly focused their attention on retention and attrition rates in higher education2,3,4,5. The difficulty of meeting the engineering needs of the U.S. economy is exacerbated by a disturbing trend. Over the past twenty years there has been an increase in attrition of engineering students. In 1975, the attrition rate for engineering freshmen was 12% and by 1990 it had grown to 24%6. Less than half of the students who start college as engineering majors actually graduate with an engineering degree. The attrition for minority students is approximately 70%7. This decline in engineering interest and persistence while the demand for engineers continues to rise is a major concern for industry and society. The American Association of Community Colleges (AACC) provides statistics that demonstrate why the community college may be an important participant in meeting the Page 892.1 “Proceedings of the 2003 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright 2003, American Society for Engineering Education” postsecondary engineering challenge8. The most recent published data from AACC (1996-97) reports that 1132 community colleges serve 5.4 million credit seeking students nationally9 approximately 46% of all first-time freshmen and 44% of U.S. undergraduates are enrolled in community colleges, and nearly half a million associate degrees are awarded annually. The student population is 58% female and 36% full-time (12 credit hours or more). Community colleges serve 46% of all African-American students, 55% of all Hispanic students, 46% of all Asian/Pacific Islander students, and 55% of all Native American students in higher education. The community college is an affordable postsecondary option with an average annual tuition of $1,518 and only a third of community college students receive any financial aid. The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) reports that there are currently over 40,000 community college students graduating annually with associate degrees in engineering and related engineering technologies and over 90% of these degrees are awarded in engineering technology10. According to NCES, the absolute number of 18-year olds in the United States will reach 4 million by 2004 and 75% of that cohort will graduate from high school. If current trends continue, 80% of those graduates will pursue postsecondary education immediately after high school graduation. Almost half of that population will attend a community college11. The Integrated Curriculum12 Since structural and cultural factors play early and significant roles in the persistence of engineering students, many colleges and universities are re-examining the first-year academic experience of their students. The National science Foundation has funded a number of programs designed to improve the pedagogy and curricula for traditional and non-traditional students in engineering. Learning is something that is done by the learner and not to the learner. Research indicates that integrated curricula can have a significantly positive impact on retention and performance by creating environments that facilitate the process of learning. There are a number of potential advantages to integrated curricula: Instructors are better informed about the overall curriculum, what their colleagues have • presented, and how their presentations connect. Class time can be saved by introducing common topics once and reinforcing them in ways • that appeal to different learning preferences. By arranging topics so that related concepts are taught simultaneously, students can • develop and retain a broader understanding of the material. Students can develop a greater understanding of the links and transition between subjects • and disciplines in ways that are more consistent with the real-world practice of engineering. Integrated curricula can also enhance the students’ abilities to work in teams through • direct experience and through observation of instructors who are functioning as a team. Differences in institutional mission, culture, and student population preclude developing a singular approach to first-year integrated curricula, but most institutions can benefit from the coordination and linkage of courses, topics and faculty. Al-Holou et al. (1999) reviewed a number of first-year integrated curricula initiatives. Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology has offered an integrated, First-Year Curriculum in • Science, Engineering, and Mathematics (IFYCSEM) since 1990. Assessment data indicate P ge 892.2 “Proceedings of the 2003 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright 2003, American Society for Engineering Education” that participating students did 10-15% better in retention and 0.3 -0.5 better in sophomore GPA than students in matched comparison groups. The SUCCEED Coalition supported an integrated freshman-sophomore curriculum • experiment for two years at the University of Florida starting in 1994. Retention improved by 10% and mathematics GPA increased 0.1-0.2 points. Texas A&M University at Kingsville has offered its First-Year Integrated Engineering • Curriculum (FYIEC) since 1995. The retention was up to 17% higher for participating students with a GPA increase of 0.1-0.5 points. In addition, the number of earned math, science, and engineering credits in the first year of the FYIEC students was almost twice that of the comparison group. Ohio State University has offered an integrated first-year curriculum since 1993. • Participating students showed improvement in GPA along with a 10-20% increase in retention. Participation in co-op/internship experiences also increased for participating students. Texas A&M has offered a Foundation Coalition first-year engineering program since • 1994. Participating students, especially women, Hispanic, and African-American engineering students are retained at levels 15-20% higher than traditional students. Although there was not a significant change in GPA, the percentage of withdrawals or D & F grades in mathematics, physics, and English was reduced by more than one-half. The University of Alabama began offering the Teaming, Integration and Design in • Engineering Curriculum (TIDE) in 1994. TIDE participants were retained at levels 1020% higher than the comparison group and their GPAs were 0.2-0.3 points higher. Drexel University stated their Enhanced Educational Experience for Engineers (E4) in • 1989. Their results are consistent with other studies showing increased retention levels of 18-23% and GPA improvement of 0.2-0.5 points. The accumulating research continues to assert that adopting an integrated first-year curricula can have a significant impact on the persistence and performance of engineering students. The advantages of these programs are particularly well-suited for addressing attrition of underrepresented groups. Building the Curriculum Although there are several models available for an integrated curriculum it is important to view them as models and not necessarily end products for an institution. Each academic institution has its own unique characteristics and it is important to assemble a team that is prepared to go through the process of developing the curriculum. The curriculum development process is critical to developing a common vision for the program. Defining the overlapping areas, agreeing on approach and evaluation, making sure that the curriculum is flexible yet capable of satisfying prerequisites, blending distinct personalities into a cohesive unit are only some of the challenges that face the development/implementation team. The Gateway to Technology curriculum was loosely modeled after the Technology Gateway w