Enrollment and Persistence of First-year Students in a Newly Accredited Engineering Program
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract First-Year Engineering Students in Newly Accredited Programs: Enrollment and Persistence DemographicsThis paper examines enrollment and persistence trends among first-year students in recentlyaccredited electrical (EE) and mechanical (ME) engineering programs at a predominantlyundergraduate-oriented, non-research intensive, historically Liberal Arts university where theprograms grew from an existing technology department. Until now, the programs have relied ona convenience sample of students with minimal program promotion or recruitment.Transcript information and surveys of students enrolled in an introductory (first-year)engineering course were collected during the first six years of the programs. Transcript dataincludes: semesters of enrollment and graduation, grades in math courses taken before andduring the first-year course, first-year course grade and current grade-point-average (GPA).Surveys given at the beginning of every semester asked students to rank their top three intendedmajors. Questions asked in surveys at semester completion included previous intended major,ranking of new top three intended majors, reason for the intended major changed. Distributionsof student interest and math preparedness upon enrollment in the introductory course wereanalyzed. Additionally, within-program and university persistence was quantified and comparedto math level and earned first-year course grade.Enrollment increases in the first-year course average 7%. One half and one quarter of thestudents plan to major in ME and EE, respectively, while one quarter plan on a different major.The GPAs and first-year course grades have stayed relatively constant.The academic plan for engineering students recommends taking Calculus I before or during thefirst-year course; students with MathLevels of Calculus or Post-Calculus are deemed “OnTrack”,others are deemed “Behind”. Currently, 48% of the students are OnTrack, and 15% are ahead inmath. For the Behind math students, persistence is poor, but for OnTrack students, persistence isacceptable. Additionally, per year, the number of students at each level is growing, but thedistribution is shifting towards Behind at a rate of 1.4%. This trend is problematic becausedoubling the number of On-Track students would require tripling first-year course enrollment.Results of this study may be informative for universities with new or under-developmentengineering programs. Results imply a need for concerted efforts at recruiting students who arewell prepared for success in engineering programs. Emphasis should be on attractingmathematically strong students to an introductory course, rather than on retaining morecurrently-enrolled freshman students.One way to improve the quality would be to add a precalculus pre-/co-requisite for the first-yearcourse. Doing so may reduce the first-year course enrollment significantly (<5%). Another step to improve qualitythat the School has already implemented is admission requirements with respect to GPA andcourse-specific grades. This step will further reduce the persistence of first-year course students,but presumably affects Behind students more than OnTrack students. The exact outcome ofthese strategies remains to be seen.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle