Sunday
Dec112011
Modeling Engineering Retention and Reflections on Strategies for Success
Sunday, December 11, 2011 at 5:00AM
I was pleased to read the current issue of the Journal of Engineering Education (JEE) and Will Tyson’s article “Modeling Engineering Degree Attainment and Achievement Using High School and College Physics and Calculus Coursetaking and Achievement”. In his article, he cited my research on engineering student retention, both my JEE article “ Is the Modeling of Freshman Engineering Success Different from Modeling of Non-engineering Success? “ and my Advances in Engineering Education article “ Model for Freshman Engineering Retention” . Both papers were co-authored with university leaders on student success, Professors Eric Dey and Gary Herrin (also past associate dean of engineering) of the University of Michigan.
In researching the modeling of freshman engineering retention, I found there were nine pillars for student success . This is discussed in the AEE paper and includes substantial literature review tables in the appendix. Here is a link to a brief explanation of the Model. http://www.veenstraconsulting.com/veenstra-model.php
Tyson’s paper recognizes the importance of the Veenstra model and further expands on the pattern of course taking of Calculus and Physics courses both in high school and early college for success as engineering majors. His research showed that “achievement in specific courses explains grades earned in college physics and calculus prerequisite courses.” However, he concluded that there was “no uniform effect of academic integration on engineering degree attainment.” Tyson did not discuss the effect of inadequate financial aid but significantly his conclusions included that students who started at community colleges taking courses required for an engineering major, “were as likely as university course takers to continue in engineering.” For developing strategies degree completion for students from low income families, this is a significant research finding.
Importance of Advising
In my research, I looked at the achievement success of students through the Calculus sequence (I,II,III) . Basically, if a student understands and has learned the concepts of Calculus I, he/she is more likely to do well in Calculus II or III. On the other hand, the evidence was clear that students who earned low grades in Calculus I were much more likely to drop out or earn a “C” or lower in Calculus II. Each course builds on the knowledge of the previous course. The Physics I course can also build on the knowledge of Calculus depending on how it is taught. My data and data of other researchers show significant evidence of the importance of correct placement of students into the first semester courses in the freshman engineering program. Even AP Calculus students must be placed in the appropriate first semester course. If a student is not ready for Calculus II even though she took AP Calculus AB in high school, she will do better academically in the first two years, if she enrolls in Calculus I. As one might expect, advisors get resistance from students on this placement issue. The advisory center and associated faculty must continually improve the university’s placement tests and place students into the appropriate course. We grow STEM graduates one student at a time, starting with advising based on best practices for the first semester.
STEM College-Ready and Generating Interest in STEM
As my model suggests, there are a number of factors that lead to graduation; graduation success if multivariate. Students with good preparation in high school have a higher success rate with the transition to engineering college and get a good start in engineering. We need to ensure that all high school graduates are STEM major college-ready, i.e. are ready for Calculus and science courses. We are very far from this goal today but many school districts and states are beginning to address this concern. For those who are not college-ready, we need positive programs and good advising to encourage students in a course taking pathway that will work for them. We must adopt the ideas of lean manufacturing and develop lean approaches for helping students be successful in their college career. By this I mean, remove roadblocks where students need to visit several offices- streamline the process so the student makes an easy transition, understands what is expected and is less stressed out by large campuses. Continue to encourage the student.
As had been discussed substantially in the research journals on engineering education, we must also have generated the interest in STEM careers, both in K12 and continuing in college through speakers, activities like a solar car competition and through internships. We need more partnerships between engineering colleges and industry. As more and more research is published on engineering retention, it is clear we need to look at the transition from P-12 to engineering college as a P-16 school system and provide more collaboration between high school and universities.
In researching the modeling of freshman engineering retention, I found there were nine pillars for student success . This is discussed in the AEE paper and includes substantial literature review tables in the appendix. Here is a link to a brief explanation of the Model. http://www.veenstraconsulting.com/veenstra-model.php
Tyson’s paper recognizes the importance of the Veenstra model and further expands on the pattern of course taking of Calculus and Physics courses both in high school and early college for success as engineering majors. His research showed that “achievement in specific courses explains grades earned in college physics and calculus prerequisite courses.” However, he concluded that there was “no uniform effect of academic integration on engineering degree attainment.” Tyson did not discuss the effect of inadequate financial aid but significantly his conclusions included that students who started at community colleges taking courses required for an engineering major, “were as likely as university course takers to continue in engineering.” For developing strategies degree completion for students from low income families, this is a significant research finding.
Importance of Advising
In my research, I looked at the achievement success of students through the Calculus sequence (I,II,III) . Basically, if a student understands and has learned the concepts of Calculus I, he/she is more likely to do well in Calculus II or III. On the other hand, the evidence was clear that students who earned low grades in Calculus I were much more likely to drop out or earn a “C” or lower in Calculus II. Each course builds on the knowledge of the previous course. The Physics I course can also build on the knowledge of Calculus depending on how it is taught. My data and data of other researchers show significant evidence of the importance of correct placement of students into the first semester courses in the freshman engineering program. Even AP Calculus students must be placed in the appropriate first semester course. If a student is not ready for Calculus II even though she took AP Calculus AB in high school, she will do better academically in the first two years, if she enrolls in Calculus I. As one might expect, advisors get resistance from students on this placement issue. The advisory center and associated faculty must continually improve the university’s placement tests and place students into the appropriate course. We grow STEM graduates one student at a time, starting with advising based on best practices for the first semester.
STEM College-Ready and Generating Interest in STEM
As my model suggests, there are a number of factors that lead to graduation; graduation success if multivariate. Students with good preparation in high school have a higher success rate with the transition to engineering college and get a good start in engineering. We need to ensure that all high school graduates are STEM major college-ready, i.e. are ready for Calculus and science courses. We are very far from this goal today but many school districts and states are beginning to address this concern. For those who are not college-ready, we need positive programs and good advising to encourage students in a course taking pathway that will work for them. We must adopt the ideas of lean manufacturing and develop lean approaches for helping students be successful in their college career. By this I mean, remove roadblocks where students need to visit several offices- streamline the process so the student makes an easy transition, understands what is expected and is less stressed out by large campuses. Continue to encourage the student.
As had been discussed substantially in the research journals on engineering education, we must also have generated the interest in STEM careers, both in K12 and continuing in college through speakers, activities like a solar car competition and through internships. We need more partnerships between engineering colleges and industry. As more and more research is published on engineering retention, it is clear we need to look at the transition from P-12 to engineering college as a P-16 school system and provide more collaboration between high school and universities.
Reader Comments