A First-Year Course Based on Conceptual Design

The College of Engineering at the University of Utah includes many majors and departments. A great deal of effort has been placed on helping students choose a major prior to enrolling at the institution, but many students still enroll as undecided students. A course was designed to provide an engineering design experience to undecided students as well as students who are not academically prepared. The objectives of the course are to help students select a major in engineering, and to provide an early design experience to help them create realistic expectations for engineering as a potential profession. The university does not have a first-year program, therefore this course is important for helping students make an informed decision about which major in engineering is right for them. This first-year engineering course is designed to demonstrate the interdisciplinary nature of engineering. Students are introduced to the design process and the grand challenges as outlined by the National Academy of Engineering. During the course of the semester, students begin to develop problem and needs statements. Those statements begin to take shape as they begin to identify marketing requirements, design specifications and begin the design process. Students are placed on interdisciplinary teams where they create innovative conceptual solutions to some of the grand challenges. The conceptual design project in the course has helped students realize where their interests lie. Furthermore, students begin to understand how their core coursework relates to both the design process and their future engineering courses. In addition to conceptual design, students in the class are introduced to research happening within the College of Engineering through both tours of research facilities as well as faculty presentations. Additionally, there are four course mentors for the course, all of which are in their junior and senior years. These mentors help students select a major and consult on their design projects. The mentor relationship occurs at several points during the semester. During the first few weeks they come into the class to answer questions about why they chose their major, what they enjoy about their major and what they hope to do with their major. During subsequent classes, they give a short presentation outlining the context of the grand challenges discussed in the course, and then answer questions in a discussion format. As the semester progresses, they are paired with teams as mentors and provide feedback during the final grading of the design projects. Student feedback was gathered after each semester, and changes were made to best meet student needs and interests. Feedback was provided in both qualitative and quantitative formats in the full paper, and demonstrated the effectiveness of the course in helping students choose a major, become familiar with the design process and create a better understanding of the engineering profession. This course has been taught for the past three years, and has been beneficial in helping many students choose a major, whether in engineering or not. Therefore, this course has been effective for helping students gain exposure to engineering design and create realistic expectations for a major and a career in engineering. Introduction Within the College of Engineering at the University of Utah, there are eight majors offered. While the retention rate of students in the program has not been low, there are barriers in place that do not allow for an easy transition between departments. Furthermore, other research universities across the US have implemented first-year engineering courses to help students gain a better understanding of engineering and design at an earlier point in their academic programs. These universities have reported higher retention rates because not only have students gained more realistic expectations of engineering, but they have also gained both complex and critical thinking skills associated with engineering design. Because of these findings, a first-year course was developed which incorporated many of the teaching methods used at other universities. The teaching methods outlined by other universities include hands-on projects, which have been proven to increase motivation of first-year students. Just-in-time instruction, which presents curriculum material just as it is needed by the students, used in conjunction with team based learning and hands-on experimentation both in and out of class has also been proven as an effective learning and teaching strategy. Other universities have utilized the consideration of context in design as a method for increasing learning. This method demonstrated that women have a natural aptitude for contextual factors, while men have a greater learning curve. Many groups have demonstrated that team-based problem solving develops essential skills for engineering students, and one group illustrated that the design experience of students is positively affected by enhanced intellectual ability. In all cases, it has been demonstrated that first-year engineering students benefit by incorporating hands-on activities, team-based project and design into first-year engineering courses. Other institutions have altered the teaching methods in the classroom to accommodate both the learning styles and the personality types of engineering students in order to increase the learning of those students, and consequently the retention of those students. Institutions have demonstrated that taking rigorous courses prior to college enrollment increases retention; however, this is not frequently the case. Furthermore, other universities have proven that incorporating learning communities increases student retention. Therefore, by creating learning communities and adapting classroom teaching that considers the abilities of the students in the classroom, engineering students are better retained in engineering majors. The problem at the University of Utah is that students were forced to choose a major during the first semester of their first year if they wanted to graduate in four years. Many students have enrolled with clear goals, and have graduated at a high rate; however, there is no mechanism to allow students to explore majors in engineering. Therefore, there needed to be a mechanism, which would allow students to explore engineering, while still gaining experience in engineering. The structure of the institution in question did not permit for a first-year course to be taught with the rigor implemented at other institutions. Furthermore, the course was not transferrable to many of the departments. Therefore a 0.5 credit hour course was designed to provide rigor and to give students an experience with the engineering design process. The course was designed to allow for exploration, but also to help students gain an understanding of engineering, so they could make an informed decision about whether they would pursue a major in engineering. Course Description A first year engineering course was designed to give students an engineering experience. The course was designed to help students choose to major in engineering or to choose something else. If students chose to study engineering, one of the aims of the course is to help them choose which major will best help them meet their goals. To provide an engineering experience, students in the class were introduced to the engineering majors offered through the university. In addition, students were introduced to the grand challenges as outlined by the National Academy of Engineering as well as the interdisciplinary nature of engineering. Students were introduced to the design process, and faculty came into the class to talk about their research with two thoughts in mind. The first was to talk about the different kinds of engineers who work on the same research projects and to identify the role of each major. The second was to address how they use the design process in their research. Faculty interactions occurred both through lab tours and through classroom presentations. The final project for the course was to incorporate the design concepts discussed in class by designing a new technology that would help solve a small and focused piece of a grand challenge of their choice. At the beginning of the semester, a presentation is given that addresses the majors in the College of Engineering, and students are assigned to bring at least three questions that they would ask an engineering student. During the next class meeting, engineering students, who are further along in their academic programs and are asked to serve as course mentors, are invited to the class to share their experiences. In this class meeting, the enrolled students meet with each course mentor in several rounds of “speed dating” where they take turns asking questions that are of interest to them. This has always been one of the most well-received class meetings of the semester because the course mentors have insights into the programs and their decision process that are not otherwise addressed in the course. After the “speed dating,” students are assigned to write a summary of what they learned. During the semester, four weeks are devoted to in-class discussion of the grand challenges. The students are assigned to conduct research on each grand challenge prior to the class meeting and to come prepared with two things they learned and two things they would like to ask the class. One or two of the course mentors prepares a five-minute presentation that outlines the grand challenge. After the introductory presentation, the remainder of the class meeting is spent either discussing the grand challenge as a group or in smaller groups where students answer specific questions related to the grand challenge. In addition to being introduced to the departments in the College of Engineering and to the grand challenges, students in the class learn about the engineerin