Implementation Projects in a Computing Theory Course

Most computer science programs expose students to theoretical aspects of computing, such as discrete mathematics, algorithms, and theory of computation. This paper presents the integration of an implementation project in a theory of computation course, so that students get a chance to grapple with the details of a transformation and/or abstract model in addition to preparing a project and demonstration to help fellow students review topics from the course. Examples of student projects include a deterministic finite automata simulator, determining if the languages of two DFAs are equal, converting a grammar to a pushdown automaton, and creating a regular expression engine. Seventeen of 25 respondents agreed or strongly agreed that the project was a valuable learning experience; six were neutral and one strongly disagreed. Student project topics were reviewed against final exam questions for corresponding language classes. While there was no statistically significant difference between groups on exam questions, the overall averages on exam questions demonstrate student mastery of the material

Helping First-Year Engineering Students Select a Major

This evidence-based practice paper evaluates a set of resources to help first-year engineering students choose their major among four fields. Choosing a major can be a daunting task for first-year college students, especially if the choices span fields with which students have little experience. In order to provide first-year engineering students time to discern, a set of resources and course activities were designed to assist students in this decision-making process. The educational theory that serves as a framework for this study is social cognitive career theory, developed by Lent, Brown, and Hackett in 1994. In particular, resources, activities, and experiences in the introduction to engineering course were designed to assist students with self-efficacy beliefs and personal goals. At this University all engineering and computer science students take an introduction to engineering course that covers the engineering process, teamwork, communication skills, the different branches of engineering, ethics, and co-curricular and extracurricular opportunities. Section sizes are ~30 students, so students can build community with peers and their professor. The professor of the Introduction to Engineering course is the academic advisor for his/her set of students. Students declare or confirm their major by the end of the first semester. Resources to help students choose a major include laboratories, advisor meetings, student panels, a semester - long team project, student chapters of professional society meetings, and on-line resources. In the fall 2012 offering of the course, we collected paper surveys from students, asking them to rate the effectiveness of a suite of resources in helping them choose their major. We asked about exposure to engineering and/or computer science prior to entering college and course materials and activities that were helpful for selecting a major. Based on the responses, we created a new set of videos and blogs featuring upper-class students who shared their journeys in how they chose their major and what they value about their major. We added new labs for the 2015 version. In fall 2015, we again asked students about the impact of all the course activities and their confidence in their major selection. The professor as advisor, laboratories and the course project have the most impact on helping students decide their major. More informational activities such as talking to other students, attending club meetings, and watching videos of other students had less impact. Based on these results, students seem to need personal, hands-on experience to determine if their self-efficacy beliefs and the values of the outcomes align with the intended major. 145 of 154 (94.2%) of students were somewhat or very confident about their major at the end of the semester. This paper describes a suite of resources and activities along with students’ evaluation of those materials in terms of discernment of their major. By disseminating the information, other universities can adopt and adapt these activities to use in their programs

Using Assessment to Continuously Improve the Retention & Persistence of At-Risk Engineering Students

At the University of Portland, studies show that students who are behind in their degree progress are not retained at similar rates as their on-track cohort and can be considered “at-risk”. For the past three years, with NSF support, we developed a voluntary retention program to support students who are considered “at-risk” of leaving the Shiley School of Engineering. “At-risk” students start behind or fall behind in their STEM courses, although they are in good standing academically i.e., they are not on academic probation. The Program includes multiple interventions targeted at increasing the persistence and ultimately the retention of these at-risk students, including, among others, year-long counseling focused on community building and academic support, and various opportunities for students to regain cohort status academically. Throughout the NSF-funded Program, we assessed particular interventions using both quantitative and qualitative studies. In this poster, our objective is to present the various iterations we made to the Program based on the ongoing assessments

Models for computer science K-12 outreach activities

It is widely known that our computer science students do not reflect the diversity of the population at large [1]. One method for encouraging broader participation in computer science is to design and deploy outreach activities targeted for K-12 students [2,3,4]. Goals for outreach activities are numerous: to provide a more accurate view of the computer science discipline, to increase students\u27 confidence in their CS abilities, to provide opportunities for students to meet working professionals, and to counter negative stereotypes about the computing culture. Outreach activities can vary widely in terms of target audience, duration, and overall objective; therefore, it might seem daunting to design and deploy outreach activities. The goal for this panel is to provide models of outreach activities for audience members to import for use in their own communities and institutions

Building a Summer Bridge Program to Increase Retention and Academic Success for First-Year Engineering Students

This paper reports on a grant-funded summer bridge program developed for incoming first-year engineering students who were not academically prepared to start Calculus 1. The six-week,residential, pre-college program was offered for the first time in the summer of 2014. The primary purpose of the program was to help students develop in their math proficiency so they could begin their freshman year on track toward their engineering or computer science degree.The summer bridge program was developed in conjunction with a multi-year grant-funded retention program at the School of Engineering at the University of X, a private, Catholic institution serving approximately 3700 undergraduate students; of those 3700, approximately 700 are engineering students.Program Objectives. The program was informed by Social Constructivist Learning Theory, which asserts that learning and development cannot occur outside of social and environmental contexts. To increase retention and success of first-year engineering students, the summer bridge program was designed to 1) Allow students to enter their freshman year on-track academically and gain exposure to college-level coursework; 2) Provide the information and support necessary to ensure a smooth transition into college; 3) Enhance student interest in and commitment to the engineering field; and 4) Help students build community on campus.Program Details There were 240 engineering students who entered the University of X in Fall 2014. Of those 240,42 did not place into Calculus 1, making them eligible for the summer bridge program; 11 students participated in the summer bridge program. The entire cost of the program, excluding meals, was subsidized by the grant, providing access for students with high financial need. During the bridge program, students took Pre-Calculus II and Intro to Theology, allowing those who completed both courses to enter their first year one course ahead. In addition to taking classes, students also participated in site visits to local companies, and attended workshops intended to introduce students to campus life. Throughout their time in the program, participants lived in the same residence hall and had the support of a peer mentor, who served as an academic and social resource for students. Assessment: There were three assessments conducted during the summer bridge program: a pre-assessment survey at the beginning of the program, and a post-assessment survey and focus group after the conclusion of the program. Data from the pre-assessment survey demonstrated that most students’ expectations were to build fundamental math skills, to learn more about the engineering field, and to get acquainted with University of X. Data from the post-assessment survey and focus group demonstrated that students felt that after completing the program they had improved in their math and writing skills, learned about the field of engineering, and had been successfully oriented to college. Although it is too early to determine the long-term academic trajectory of the 11 participants, based on assessment data already collected, it appears as though the summer program was successful in many of its stated goals

Best Practices for Advising At-Risk First-Year Engineering Students

This paper reports on challenges identified and best practices developed through advising at-risk first-year engineering students, synthesizing both existing literature as well as the experiences of advisors and faculty members in the School of Engineering. Based on conversations with and feedback from firstyear students, it has become clear that at-risk students face unique challenges that can affect their persistence in engineering. These challenges include: the high school to college transition, the difficulty of high-achievers experiencing failure for the first time, the competitive culture of engineering, learning how to take ownership of the college experience, and pressure in high-stakes courses. With these challenges in mind, the School of Engineering has adopted a number of best practices that are targeted specifically at supporting at-risk first-year students. These best practices include: group advising, holistic advising, growth mindset strategies, flow charts, student socials, and student assessment