peec/ ʻike annual report 2012 - university of · pdf filepage 1 peec / ike 2012 annual report...

PEEC / IKE 2012 Annual Report Updated: 9/11/2012

PEEC/̒IKE Annual Report

2012

July 16th

, 2012

Michelle Sagario

PEEC Assessment Specialist ([email protected])


Goal 1 4

1.1 Objective 1.1 4

1.1.1 Goal and Overview............................................................................................................... 4

1.1.2 PEEC Courses Offered........................................................................................................... 6

1.1.3 Mean Scores ........................................................................................................................ 7

1.1.4 Success Rates ....................................................................................................................... 8

1.1.5 Objective 1.1 Summary ...................................................................................................... 14

1.2 Objective 1.2 15

1.2.1 Goal and Overview............................................................................................................. 15

1.2.2 Engineering 100: Introduction to Engineering .................................................................... 15

1.2.3 Online Courses ................................................................................................................... 17

1.2.4 Mean Scores ...................................................................................................................... 18

1.2.5 Success Rates ..................................................................................................................... 19




Goal 2 26



2.1.2 SEE Descriptions ................................................................................................................. 27

2.1.3 Hawaii Math Emporium Model (HMEM) ............................................................................ 60




2.2.2 Community Service ............................................................................................................ 70

2.2.3 Peer Mentoring .................................................................................................................. 70

2.2.4 Undergraduate Research Experience (URE) ....................................................................... 76

2.2.5 REIS Opportunities ............................................................................................................. 86




2.3.2 Engineering Industries ....................................................................................................... 90

2.3.3 Government Partners ........................................................................................................ 92

2.3.4 Enrichment Seminars ......................................................................................................... 96


2.3.5 ʻIKE Student Symposium .................................................................................................... 98

2.3.6 Objective 2.3 Summary .................................................................................................... 101

2.4 Overall Goals 102

2.4.1 ASNS Students Completion .............................................................................................. 102

2.4.2 Pre-Engineering Core Curriculum Completion .................................................................. 103

2.4.3 UHMCOE Bachelor of Science Degree Completion ........................................................... 104

2.4.4 Other Measures of Success .............................................................................................. 104


Goal 1

A Quality Pre-Engineering Core Curriculum: that prepares Native Hawaiian students for success in

progressively higher level courses in their Engineering education, effectively integrating Calculus, and that is available online in every semester during the project and beyond.

Figure 1: Logic Model for Objective 1

1.1 Objective 1.1

1.1.1 Goal and Overview

To develop a Pre-Engineering Core Curriculum that prepares Native Hawaiian (NH) students for success in progressively higher level courses in their Engineering education, effectively integrates Calculus, online in every semester at the initial six Hawai̒ i PEEC campuses. This curriculum will prepare Native Hawaiian students for degree completion in Civil, Electrical, or Mechanical Engineering.


The Pre-Engineering Core Curriculum is composed of the following courses:

Table 1. Pre-Engineering Core Curriculum

Course Description Course Alpha

General Chemistry I CHEM 161/161B

General Chemistry I Laboratory CHEM 161L

General Chemistry II CHEM 162/162B

Trigonometry / Analytic Geometry MATH 140/140X

Calculus I MATH 205/241/251A

Calculus II MATH 206/242/252A

Calculus II MATH 231/243/253A

General Physics I PHYS 170

General Physics II PHYS 272

Applied Mechanics I CE 270/CEE 270

Programming for Engineers EE 160/ EE 150

Basic Circuit Analysis EE 211

The analysis and assessment of Objective 1.1 will cover the following topics: • Section 1.1.2: PEEC Courses Offered: summarizes the available core courses

available to pre-engineering students. • Section 1.1.3: Mean scores: presents the overall mean grade values of all PEEC

courses taken in the Fall 2011 semester. Comparisons are provided between: o Native Hawaiian (NH) and Non-Native Hawaiian (Non-NH) students o ʻIKE Cohort Students and Non-Cohort Students (NH and Non-NH) o ʻIKE Cohort Students and Non-Cohort Students (NH students only)

• Section 1.1.4: Success Rates: calculate the overall success rates in the various pre-engineering courses taken in the Fall 2011 semester. Comparisons are provided between:

o Native Hawaiian (NH) and Non-Native Hawaiian (Non-NH) students o ʻIKE Cohort Students and Non-Cohort Students (NH and Non-NH) o ʻIKE Cohort Students and Non-Cohort Students (NH students only)

All final grades from pre-engineering courses across the PEEC campuses were used to

calculate mean scores and success rates. Mean scores and success rates from the Spring 2012 semester were not available at the time of this report.


1.1.2 PEEC Courses Offered

The following table summarizes the PEEC courses offered at the 6 collaborating PEEC campuses in Fall 2011 and Spring 2012.

Table 2. PEEC Courses offered at PEEC Campuses (Fall 2011 & Spring 2012)

Campus Term CE/CEE

270 CHEM

161/161B CHEM 161L

CHEM 162/162B

EE 150/160

EE 211

MATH 140/140X

Calculus 1

Calculus 2

Calculus 3

PHYS 170

PHYS 272 Total

HON Fall 2011 1 1 2 1 1 1 7

Spring 2012 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 10

KAP Fall 2011 1 7 7 3 1 1 3 4 2 1 2 1 33

Spring 2012 1 7 7 4 1 3 3 2 1 2 1 32

LEE Fall 2011 1 2 1 1 1 4 3 2 1 1 17

Spring 2012 4 1 4 2 2 1 1 15

MAN Fall 2011 2 3 32 1 3 4 8 10 8 5 2 2 80

Spring 2012 2 2 14 2 5 3 9 8 8 3 2 2 60

MAU Fall 2011 1 1 1 1 4

Spring 2012 1 1 1 1 4

WIN Fall 2011 1 1 2 1 1 1 7

Spring 2012 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 11

ALL Fall 2011 4 15 42 7 5 6 19 20 13 8 5 4 148

Spring 2012 3 17 25 10 5 4 21 16 15 6 7 3 132 Note: Chemistry 161B at LeeCC includes the Chemistry 161L portion also. In Fall 2011, a total of 148 PEEC courses were offered with the majority offered at UH Manoa (80), followed by KapCC (33),

and LeeCC (17). In Spring 2012, a total of 132 PEEC courses were offered in Spring 2012 with the majority offered at UH Manoa (60), KapCC (32) and LeeCC (15). Manoa, KapCC, and LeeCC are the only campuses that offer engineering courses.


Table 3 below shows a summary of the students enrolled in pre-engineering courses in the PEEC campuses. 16% of students enrolled in at least one pre-engineering course are Native Hawaiian students. In comparison, there are 19% Native Hawaiian students enrolled in the UH system. The percentage of Native Hawaiian students enrolled in at least one pre-engineering course is comparable to the percentage of overall Native Hawaiian students in the UH system.

Table 3. Summary of enrolled students in pre-engineering courses

Fall 2011 # of students enrolled in at least one pre-engineering course 2763 # of NH students enrolled in at least one pre-engineering course 439 (15.9%) # of ̒ IKE cohort students enrolled in at least one pre-engineering course 36 (1.3%) % of NH students in the UH System 18.5%

1.1.3 Mean Scores

Final grades were assigned the following values:

• A+ = 4.0, A = 4.0, A- = 3.7, • B+ = 3.3, B = 3.0, B- = 2.7, • C+ = 2.3, C = 2.0, C- = 1.7, • CR = 2.0, • D+ = 1.3, D = 1.0, D- = 0.7, • F = 0.0 • Special Grades: N/W/I/L/NC = 0.0.

The following table compares mean grade values between the different categories which were analyzed using two-tailed student’s t-test. An alpha-level of 0.05 was used.

Table 4. Mean Grade Values by Category

N

Mean Grade Value

Letter Grade Associate to Mean Grade

Value SD p-value Overall (All students, campuses, courses) 4751 2.193 C+/C 1.4161 - Ethnicity

Native Hawaiian (NH) 749 1.939 C/C- 1.4416 0.000

Non-Native Hawaiian (Non-NH) 4002 2.241 C+/C 1.4064 Cohort vs. Non-Cohort

Cohort 71 2.038 C/C+ 1.4991 0.352

Non-Cohort (NH + Non-NH) 4680 2.196 C/C+ 1.4149 Cohort vs. Non-Cohort

Cohort 71 2.038 C/C+ 1.4991 0.544

Non-Cohort (NH Only) 678 1.929 C/C- 1.4362


Native Hawaiian (NH) vs. Non-Native Hawaiian (Non-NH) Mean Scores There is a significant difference in the mean grade value between Native Hawaiian (1.939)

and Non-Native Hawaiian (2.241) students. The Native Hawaiian student’s mean grade value was between a C and C-. The mean grade value for Non-Native Hawaiian students was between a C+ and C.

ʻIKE Cohort Students vs. Non-Cohort Students Mean Scores There was no statistical significant difference when the students in the ʻIKE cohort success

rates were compared to students who were not in the ʻIKE cohorts as seen in Table 4.

1.1.4 Success Rates

Definitions for success rates tables are as follows: • Successful completers Students who receive a grade of C or higher or credit (CR). • Attempters Students who attempted any PEEC course during the

respective term regardless of outcome (includes students who received special grades: I, W, N, NC, and L).

• Success Rate # of Successful Completers divided by # of Attempters. Statistical analysis when comparing success rates of different categories used the chi-square

test. An alpha-level of 0.05 was used. The tables in this section summarize success rates over the entire PEEC campuses. An

additional column is included to summarize success rates over the PEEC community college campuses as the majority of retention strategies will be implemented at the community college level.

Overall Success Rates The following table summarizes the success rates of the PEEC courses available in Fall 2011.

Table 5. Overall PEEC Course Success Rates

Course Successful Completers Attempters

Success Rate

CCs Success Rate

CE270/CEE270 58 139 41.7% 74.4% Chem161/161B 601 1123 53.5% 59.2% CHEM 161L 770 893 86.2% 79.7%

Chem 162/162B 238 376 63.3% 66.4% EE150/160 80 108 74.1% 72.3%

EE 211 94 120 78.3% 55.6% Math 140/140X 299 498 60.0% 61.7%

Calculus 1 370 541 68.4% 64.0% Calculus 2 196 304 64.5% 67.0% Calculus 3 196 275 71.3% 77.8% PHYS 170 129 181 71.3% 69.5% PHYS 272 140 193 72.5% 52.2%

Grand Total 3171 4751 66.7% 65.6%


Native Hawaiian (NH) vs. Non Native Hawaiian (Non-NH) The following table summarizes the Fall 2011 PEEC courses success rates comparing Native

Hawaiian and Non-Native Hawaiian students. Because of some courses having small sample sizes (< 5 students), p-values were not calculated for community college success rates in Table 7.

The data indicates that there is a significant difference between the PEEC course success rates between Native Hawaiian (60%) and Non-Native Hawaiian (68%) students. Native Hawaiian student success rate was below their Non-Native Hawaiian peers.

Table 6. Success Rates (Native Hawaiian vs. Non-Native Hawaiian)

Successful Completers

Attempters Success Rate p-value CCs

Success Rate

p-value

Non-Native Hawaiian 2723 4002 68.0% 0.000

67.2% 0.006

Native Hawaiian 448 749 59.8% 58.5%

When broken down into subjects/courses, the data indicates that there is significant difference between the success rates of Native Hawaiian and Non-Native Hawaiian students for the following courses: General Chemistry 1, Calculus 1, Calculus 2, and General Physics 1.

Table 7. Success Rates by Courses (Native Hawaiian vs. Non-Native Hawaiian)

Courses Successful Completers

Attempters Success Rate p-value CCs Success

Rate

CE270/CEE270 Non-NH 43 109 39.4%

0.299 72.4%

NH 15 30 50.0% 80.0%

Chem161/161B Non-NH 520 944 55.1%

0.016 62.1%

NH 81 179 45.3% 47.0%

CHEM 161L Non-NH 661 762 86.7%

0.278 81.1%

NH 109 131 83.2% 72.7%

Chem 162/162B Non-NH 201 320 62.8%

0.641 66.1%

NH 37 56 66.1% 68.2%

EE150/160 Non-NH 68 90 75.6%

0.432 72.2%

NH 12 18 66.7% 72.7%

EE 211 Non-NH 76 95 80.0%

0.388 55.0%

NH 18 25 72.0% 57.1%

Math 140/140X Non-NH 258 426 60.6%

0.562 61.6%

NH 41 72 56.9% 62.2%

Calculus 1 Non-NH 312 438 71.2%

0.003 68.4%

NH 58 103 56.3% 46.2%


0.009 67.0%

NH 19 41 46.3% 66.7%


0.596 79.1%

NH 32 47 68.1% 72.7%

PHYS 170 Non-NH 120 160 75.0%

0.002 71.7%

NH 9 21 42.9% 50.0%

PHYS 272 Non-NH 123 167 73.7%

0.38 52.5%

NH 17 26 65.4% 50.0%


ʻIKE Cohort vs. Non-Cohort (Native Hawaiian and Non-Native Hawaiian) The following table summarizes the PEEC courses success rates comparing students in the

ʻIKE cohort with students NOT in the ʻIKE cohort (Hawaiian and Non-Hawaiian students). The data indicates that there is no significant difference between the PEEC course success

rates between the ʻIKE Cohort students (66%) and all other students (67%). The students in the ʻIKE cohorts were generally performing similar to their non-cohort (Hawaiian and Non-Native Hawaiian) counterparts.

Table 8. Success Rate (ʻIKE Cohort vs. Non-Cohort (Native Hawaiian + Non-Native Hawaiian))


Attempters Success Rate

p-value CC

Success Rate

p-value

ʻIKE Cohort 47 71 66.2% 0.922

66.2% 0.907 Non-Cohort

(NH + Non-NH) 3124 4680 66.8%

65.5%

The data is further broken down by comparing each PEEC course. Table 9 shows the success

rate comparisons of ʻIKE cohort students and all non-cohort students (Native Hawaiian and Non-Native Hawaiian). Because of several courses having small sample sizes (< 5 students), p-values were not calculated for this table.


Table 9. Success Rates by Courses (ʻIKE Cohort vs. Non-Cohort (Native Hawaiian + Non-Native Hawaiian))

Successful Completers Attempters

Success Rate

CCs Success Rate

CE270/CEE270 ʻIKE Cohort 7 12 58.3% 58.3%

Non-Cohort 51 127 40.2% 72.7%

Chem161/161B ʻIKE Cohort 7 12 58.3% 58.3%

Non-Cohort 594 1111 53.5% 59.2%

CHEM 161L ʻIKE Cohort 6 7 85.7% 85.7%

Non-Cohort 764 886 86.2% 79.5%

Chem 162/162B ʻIKE Cohort 2 2 100.0% 100%

Non-Cohort 236 374 63.1% 66.2%

EE150/160 ʻIKE Cohort 3 3 100.0% 100%

Non-Cohort 77 105 73.3% 70.5%

EE 211 ʻIKE Cohort 3 3 100.0% 100%

Non-Cohort 91 117 77.8% 53.8

Math 140/140X ʻIKE Cohort 0 1 0.0% 0.0%

Non-Cohort 299 497 60.2% 61.9%

Calculus 1 ʻIKE Cohort 4 7 57.1% 57.1%

Non-Cohort 366 534 68.5% 64.7%


Non-Cohort 191 297 64.3% 66.0%


Non-Cohort 192 268 71.6% 80.0%

PHYS 170 ʻIKE Cohort 2 3 66.7% 66.7%

Non-Cohort 127 178 71.3% 68.4%

PHYS 272 ʻIKE Cohort 4 7 57.1% 57.1%

Non-Cohort 136 186 73.1% 52.3% Note: Non-Cohort in Table 9 includes NH & Non-NH

Based solely on success rates, of the various PEEC subjects offered, students in the ʻIKE

cohort had higher success rates in the following courses summarized in the following table.

Table 10. ̒IKE cohort student had higher success rate in following courses Considering all PEEC Campuses Considering only Community College

Campuses CE 270

CHEM 161 CHEM 161L

CHEM 162 CHEM 162 EE150/160 EE150/160

EE211 EE211 Calculus 2 Calculus 2

PHYS 272


ʻIKE Cohort vs. Non-Cohort (Native Hawaiian students only) The following table summarizes the PEEC courses success rates comparing students in the

ʻIKE cohort with Native Hawaiian students not in the ʻIKE cohort. The data indicates that there is no significant difference between the PEEC course success

rates between the ʻIKE cohort students (66.2%) and Native Hawaiian students not in the cohorts (59.1%). In comparison, from Table 6, all Native Hawaiian students in pre-engineering courses (which include ̒IKE cohort students and non-cohort students) had a success rate of 59.8%.

Table 11. Success Rate (ʻIKE Cohort vs. Native Hawaiian Non-Cohort)


Attempters Success Rate p-value CC

Success Rate

p-value

ʻIKE Cohort 47 71 66.2% 0.249

66.2% 0.161 Non-Cohort

(NH Only) 401 678 59.1%

56.9%

This was further broken down to comparing each of the PEEC courses. The following table shows the success rate comparisons of ʻIKE cohort students and Native Hawaiian non-cohort students. Because of some courses having small sample sizes (< 5 students), p-values were not calculated for this table.


Table 12. Success Rates by Course (ʻIKE Cohort vs. Native Hawaiian Non-Cohort)


Success Rate

CCs Success

Rate

CE270/CEE270 ʻIKE Cohort 7 12 58.3% 58.3%

Non-Cohort 8 18 44.4% 75.0%

CHEM 161/161B ʻIKE Cohort 7 12 58.3% 58.3%

Non-Cohort 74 167 44.3% 45.8%

CHEM 161L ʻIKE Cohort 6 7 85.7% 85.7%

Non-Cohort 103 124 83.1% 71.0%

CHEM 162/162B ʻIKE Cohort 2 2 100.0% 100.0%

Non-Cohort 35 54 64.8% 66.7%

EE150/160 ʻIKE Cohort 3 3 100.0% 100.0%

Non-Cohort 9 15 60.0% 62.5%

EE 211 ʻIKE Cohort 3 3 100.0% 100.0%

Non-Cohort 15 22 68.2% 50.0%

Math 140/ 140X ʻIKE Cohort 0 1 0.0% 0.0%

Non-Cohort 41 71 57.7% 63.6%


Non-Cohort 54 96 56.3% 49.0%


Non-Cohort 14 34 41.2% 55.6%


Non-Cohort 28 40 70.0% 85.7%

PHYS 170 ʻIKE Cohort 2 3 66.7% 66.7%

Non-Cohort 7 18 38.9% 25.0%

PHYS 272 ʻIKE Cohort 4 7 57.1% 57.1%

Non-Cohort 13 19 68.4% 50.0% Note: Non-Cohort in Table 11 includes only Native Hawaiian students.

Based solely on success rates, students in the ʻIKE cohorts generally had higher success rates than Native Hawaiian students not in the ʻIKE cohort in all courses except: Trigonometry/Analytic Geometry (Math 140), Calculus 3, and General Physics 2 (PHYS272).

When taking into account only community college success rates, ʻIKE cohort students had higher success rates in all but Applied Mechanics I (CE270), Trigonometry/Analytic Geometry (Math 140), and Calculus 3.


1.1.5 Objective 1.1 Summary

• PEEC Courses o 148 courses offered in the Fall 2011 term. o 132 courses offered in the Spring 2012 term.

• Mean Scores o Native Hawaiian students taking PEEC courses had a mean grade score of 1.939

which is approximately a C to C- grade average. o Non-Native Hawaiian students taking PEEC courses had a mean grade score of

2.241, which is approximately a C+ to C grade average. o When isolating ̒IKE cohort students, they showed no statistical difference in grade

averages to non-cohort students. • Success Rates

o Native Hawaiian student success rate in PEEC courses was 60% while Non-Native Hawaiian student success rate was 68%.

� There was significant difference in NH and Non-NH student success rate for the following courses: General Chemistry 1, Calculus 1 and 2, and General Physics 1.

o ʻIKE cohort student success rate was 66%. o Non-cohort (Native Hawaiian + Non-Native Hawaiian) student success rate was

67%. o Non-cohort (Native Hawaiian only) student success rate was 59%.

• In general, Native Hawaiian student success rates are lower than students that are not Native Hawaiian. Additional strategies will be implemented during the following year include:

o Monthly meetings with students, o Increased social networking opportunities for students, peer mentors, faculty, and

staff, o Placing peer mentors with courses that had low Native Hawaiian success rates, o PLUS mentoring.


1.2 Objective 1.2


Strengthen the existing Pre-Engineering core curriculum by developing one new course

Engineering 100, Introduction to Engineering, and one existing course, Physics 272, General Physics 2, for online delivery.

The analysis and assessment of Objective 1.2 will cover the following topics:

• Section 1.2.1: Engineering 100: describes the Engineering 100 course developed at UH Mānoa.

• Section 1.2.2: Online courses: summarizes the available online core pre-engineering courses available to students.

• Section 1.2.3: Mean Scores: presents the overall mean grade values of all online PEEC courses taken in Fall 2011. Comparisons will be made between:

o Face-to-Face and Online Course Sections o Online Course Sections (Native Hawaiian & Non-Native Hawaiian Students)

• Section 1.2.4: Success Rates: shows calculated success rates in the various online pre-engineering courses taken in Fall 2011. Comparisons will be made between:

o Face-to-Face and Online Course Sections o Online Course Sections (Native Hawaiian & Non-Native Hawaiian Students)

All final grades from online pre-engineering courses across the PEEC campuses were used to

calculate mean scores and success rates. Mean scores and success rates from the Spring 2012 semester were not available at the time of this report.

1.2.2 Engineering 100: Introduction to Engineering

The University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa (UHM) is now offering Engineering 100 entitled "How to Succeed in Engineering," team-taught by Dr. Tep Dobry and Mr. Josh Kaakua every semester. ENGR 100 is an optional one-credit course whose aim is to serve as an introductory seminar to the field of engineering. Practicum sessions strive to integrate course material from science and engineering and apply it to engineering problems. ENGR 100 consists of two parts: a set of homework and recitation components complemented by seminar/discussion sessions. Six (6) Teaching Assistants are also present from Chemistry and Mathematics courses to support students' learning experiences throughout the semester. The course objectives and goals are as follows:

o Provide academic support for all students in science and engineering gateway courses such as Math 140 – 243, CHEM 161, and PHYS 170;

o Provide an understanding of the study of engineering and what it takes to succeed as a student;

o Provide an understanding of the engineering profession and its impact in Hawaiʻi and society at large;


o Develop opportunities for students to pursue the resources available through mentorships, internships, and scholarships;

o Increase academic community.

Leeward Community College is also offering ME 213 whose intent is to introduce the student to the design process and how computer tools are used in engineering analysis, design and report writing. The software used includes work processing, spreadsheet, Computer Aided Drawing (CAD), and 3-D solid Modeling. Computers are used to help solve problems, create designs, and generate memos and engineering reports. The objectives of the courses are as follows:

• Learn the process of design • Use open-ended design problems to practice engineering design • Work in teams to develop and produce products • Learn computer aided design (CAD) and 3-D solid modeling • Learn to communicate effectively through engineering report writing • Learn engineering economics and statistical quality control (SQC) • Learn about engineering ethics and social responsibility

The course is divided into 3 segments: 1) engineering communication, economics, and statistics 2) solid mechanics and 3) mechanics and computer aided design. Three projects are conducted throughout the semesters and provide the opportunity for students to demonstrate their understanding and mastery of the following topics: basic statistics, engineering economics, statics, ballistic motion, and CAD. The final project is conducted through a friendly competition, which involves the design, construction, and use of a trebuchet type of system.

Kapi`olani Community College also offered ME 213 in conjunction with EE 296. Both courses are still under development and will be integrated into 3 common projects: 1) Simulated NASA launch (under development), 2) Remote sensing Weather Station (partially implemented) , and 3) Sustainable Energy (partially implemented).

1) Simulated NASA launch

A system will be launched in low altitude. During the flight, telemetry data will be sent to the Control Ground Station, and parachute deployment will be performed to maintain a specific descent rate.

- ME213 focuses on the simulation of the mechanical aspects such as descent rate, parachute design, deployment mechanism, mechanical design (Solidworks), etc..)

- EE296 focuses on the simulation of the electrical/programming aspects such as MCU programing for barometer, GPS, as well as design of the Control Ground Station (CGS) for remote telemetry using Matlab.

2) Remote sensing Weather Station


Temperature, humidity, and pressure sensors were remotely monitored through 3 stations positioned in specific locations across KapCC campus. GIS software and Matlab will be used to display, and analysis the acquisition of weather data as a function of time and position.

3) Sustainable Energy projects

Three teams worked on an integrated project involving a solar, wind and power generator and control subsystems.

- The Solar Team was charged to develop a system of lenses and mirrors to concentrate solar power to a Stirling engine modified with a heat pipe and thermal sink. The Wind Team utilizes aeroelastic flutter and neodymium magnets to directly create electricity collected via induction. The Generator Team is harnessing, compiling, and unifying the electromechanical outputs of the other two teams, with circuit protection and filtering.

Additional projects were also integrated in these courses and included:

- Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) system - Remote Switch for the Hearing Impaired - Thrust force measurement of an asymmetric capacitor under high voltage

1.2.3 Online Courses

Newly Developed Online PEEC Courses

The three following courses have been appended to the list of online courses the UH system has developed to help support Hawaiian students and strengthen the Pre-Engineering curriculum.

Online General Physics II course: PHYS 272

General Physics II has been developed in Fall 2010-Spring 2011 and implemented for the first time in Spring 2011 by Dr. Maria Bautista at Kapi̒ olani Community College. Success rates for the General Physics II online course in Fall 2011 can be found in Table 5.

Online Programming for Engineers course: EE 160

Programming for Engineers has been developed and piloted in Fall 2010-Spring 2011; it has been implemented for the first time in Spring 2012 by Dr. Tep Dobry at the University of Hawai̒ i at Mānoa.

Online Basic Circuit Analysis course: EE 211

Basic Circuit Analysis has been developed in Fall 2011 and was piloted by Dr. Victor Lubecke at University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa in Spring 2012.

Existing Online PEEC Courses


Other PEEC courses available online in Fall 2011 and Spring 2012 include:

• General Chemistry 1 (CHEM 161/161B) • General Chemistry 2 (CHEM 162/162B) • Trigonometry / Analytic Geometry (MATH 140/140X) • Calculus based General Physics (PHYS 170)

The table below is a summary of the PEEC online courses offered at the PEEC campuses in

Fall 2011 and Spring 2012.

Table 13. Online PEEC courses offered at PEEC campuses (Fall 2011 & Spring 2012)

Campus Term CHEM 161/161B

CHEM 162/162B

EE 150/160

EE 211

MATH 140/140X

PHYS 170

PHYS 272 Totals

KAP Fall 2011 3 1 1 1 1 7

Spring 2012 3 1 1 1 6

MAN Spring 2012 1 1* 1

ALL Fall 2011 3 1 1 1 1 7

Spring 2012 3 1 1 1 1 1 7 *EE211 was piloted in Spring 2012.

Out of the twelve courses in the Pre-Engineering Core, the PEEC campuses are offering

seven online, which represents 58%. The remaining courses that have not been developed online by the end of year two are: Chemistry 161 Lab, Calculus I, II, III, and Civil Engineering 270.

Table 14 below shows a summary of the students enrolled in online pre-engineering courses in the PEEC collaboration campuses. 19% of the students enrolled in at least one online pre-engineering course are Native Hawaiian (NH) students.

Table 14. Summary of enrolled students in online pre-engineering courses

Fall 2011 # of student enrolled in at least one pre-engineering course 2763 # of students enrolled in at least one ONLINE pre-engineering course 162 (5.9%) # of NH students enrolled in at least one ONLINE pre-engineering course 31 (19.1%) # of ̒ IKE cohort students enrolled in at least one ONLINE pre-engineering course 3 (1.9%)

1.2.4 Mean Scores

Final grades were assigned the following values: • A+ = 4.0, A = 4.0, A- = 3.7, • B+ = 3.3, B = 3.0, B- = 2.7, • C+ = 2.3, C = 2.0, C- = 1.7, • CR = 2.0, • D+ = 1.3, D = 1.0, D- = 0.7, • F = 0.0 • Special Grades: N/W/I/L/NC = 0.0


The following table compares mean grade values between the different categories which were analyzed using two-tailed student’s t-test. An alpha-level of 0.05 was used.

Table 15. Mean Grade Values by Category

N

Mean Grade Value

Letter Grade Associate to Mean Grade

Value SD p-value Overall (All students, campuses, courses) 4751 2.193 C+/C 1.4161 - Delivery Method Face-to-Face 4543 2.212 C+/C 1.4052

0.000 Online 208 1.793 C-/D 1.5882 Online Courses Non-Native Hawaiian 174 1.92 C/C- 1.5263

0.013 Native Hawaiian 34 1.147 D+/D 1.5758

Face-to-Face vs. Online As presented in Table 15, there is a significant difference in the mean grades between students

in face-to-face courses (2.212) and in online courses (1.793). The students taking face-to-face course sections mean grades were between a C+ and C. The students taking online course sections mean grades were between a C and C-.

Online Courses: Native Hawaiian vs. Non-Native Hawaiian Mean Grades There is also a significant difference in the mean grades between Native Hawaiian (1.147)

and Non-Native Hawaiian students (1.92) enrolled in online courses. The Native Hawaiian (NH) students enrolled in online courses had mean grades between a D+ and D. The Non-Native Hawaiian (non-NH) students enrolled in online courses had mean grades between a C and C-. This is also presented in Table 15.

1.2.5 Success Rates

Definitions for success rates tables are as follows: • Successful completers Students who receive a grade of C or higher or credit (CR). • Attempters Students who attempted any PEEC course during the Fall

2011 semester regardless of outcome (includes students who received special grades: I, W, N, NC, and L).

• Success Rate # of Successful Completers divided by # of Attempters. Statistical analysis when comparing success rates of different categories used the chi-square

test when appropriate. An alpha-level of 0.05 was used. Overall Success Rates (Online vs. Face-to-Face Courses)


The following table compares the success rates of online and face-to-face courses during the

Fall 2011 semester. The data indicates that there is a significant difference between the success rates of online (57%) and face-to-face (67%) courses.

Table 16. Success Rates (Face-to-Face vs. Online Courses)


Attempters Success Rate p-value

Face-to-Face 3053 4543 67.2% 0.002

Online 118 208 56.7%

Grand Total 3171 4751 66.7%

When broken down into subjects, the data indicates that there is significant difference

between the success rates of face-to-face and online students for the General Physics 2 (PHYS 272) course. The online course success rate for PHYS 272 was 44% while the success rate for the face-to-face sections was 77%.

Table 17. Success Rates by Courses (Face-to-Face vs. Online)


Attempters Success Rate

p-value

Chem161/161B Face-to-Face 544 1023 53.2%

0.464 Online 57 100 57.0%

Chem 162/162B Face-to-Face 220 346 63.6%

0.696 Online 18 30 60.0%

Math 140/Math 140X Face-to-Face 283 469 60.3%

0.581 Online 16 29 55.2%

PHYS 170 Face-to-Face 112 155 72.3%

0.474 Online 17 26 65.4%

PHYS 272 Face-to-Face 130 170 76.5%

0.001 Online 10 23 43.5%

Native Hawaiian vs. Non-Native Hawaiian (Face-to-Face vs. Online Courses) In both face-to-face and online courses, there is significant difference between the success

rates of Native Hawaiian and Non-Native Hawaiian students. Generally, Native Hawaiian students had a lower success rate than Non-Native Hawaiian students.

Table 18. Success Rates by Ethnicity (Face-to-Face vs. Online)


Attempters Success Rate p-value

Face-to-Face Non-NH 2618 3828 68.4%

0.000 NH 435 715 60.8%

Online Non-NH 105 174 60.3%

0.017 NH 13 34 38.2%

Grand Total 3171 4751 66.7%


This was further broken down to comparing the specific courses that have online sections to their face-to-face course counterparts. The following table shows the success rate comparisons. Because some courses have small sample sizes (< 5 students), p-values were not calculated for this table. In general, Non-Native Hawaiian students had higher success rates than Native Hawaiian students in both face-to-face and online courses. Based solely on success rates, the courses where Native Hawaiian students had higher success rates included: General Chemistry 2 (face-to-face sections) and General Physics 1 (online sections).

Table 19. Success Rates by Courses/Method (NH vs. Non-NH)


Success Rate

Chem161/161B


NH 76 161 47.2%


NH 5 18 27.8%

Chem 162/162B


NH 33 48 68.8%


NH 4 8 50.0%

Math 140/Math 140X


NH 39 67 58.2%


NH 2 5 40.0%

PHYS 170


NH 7 18 38.9%


NH 2 3 66.7%

PHYS 272 Face-to-Face

Non-NH 113 144 78.5%

NH 17 26 65.4%



• Engineering 100 o UH Mānoa offers an optional one credit Engineering 100 course to freshmen

serving as an introductory seminar to the engineering field. The course also provides academic support for pre-engineering gateway courses including General Chemistry 1, General Physics 1, and Math courses from Trigonometry/Analytic Geometry to Calculus 3.

• Online Courses o The following courses were developed in the Fall 2010 and 2011. They were

piloted or offered for the first time during the duration of the PEEC grant. � General Physics 2 was offered in Fall 2011 with a 44% success rate. � Programming for Engineers was offered in Spring 2012.


� Basic Circuit Analysis was piloted in Spring 2012. • Mean Scores: Face-to-Face vs. Online

o Students in face-to-face PEEC courses had a mean grade value of 2.212 which is approximately a C+ to C grade average. Students in online PEEC courses had a mean grade value of 1.793 which is a C- to D+ grade average.

• Mean Scores: Online Courses o Native Hawaiian students in online courses had a mean grade value of 1.147

(D+ to D grade average). o Non-Native Hawaiian students in online courses had a mean grade value of

1.92 (C to C- grade average). • Success Rates: Face-to-Face vs. Online

o Courses taught face-to-face had a success rate of 67% while courses taught online had a success rate of 57%.

� There was significant difference in face-to-face and online course success rate for General Physics 2 (PHYS 272).

• Success Rates: Online Courses o When comparing success rates for online courses, Native Hawaiian student

success rate was 38% while Non-Native Hawaiian student success rate was 60%.

• There are clear disparities between the success rates of online and face-to-face courses. Our strategy for next year is to develop and implement treatments to online courses in our Pre-Engineering core that include more interactions between students and instructor as well as more interactive assignments conducted in class. The emphasis on the role of mentors following specific sections to support Native Hawaiian students will also be implemented.


1.3 Objective 1.3


Integrate key concepts from one REIS courses in Mechanical Engineering, “Introduction to Engineering Design” (ME 213), and student projects from two REIS courses “Junior/Senior Engineering Design” (ME 481-482), into SEE 1,2,3 and pre-engineering courses.

The integration of ME213 and ME 481/482 concepts and methodologies into SEE3 Summer Research experience is described and demonstrated as follow:

During the PEEC/IKE-REIS Summer Research Project, our methodology to accomplish successful project completion within our design constraints is to implement a total product development cycle from conceptualization to realization following basic design processes and steps as taught in our Senior Design Course of ME 481 & ME 482, where the design processes and steps are followed including:

• Determination of the needs • Project Definition with Objectives • Project Planning (Gantt Chart) • Finance (Budgetting) • Background/Technology Search on Prior Art • Conceptualization • Brainstorming • Three Alternatives per Concept • Decision Making Matrices with Weighting Factors to Select Best Concept • Rapid Prototyping (SolidWorks Solid Modeling) • Breakdown of the Concept/Design/System into Subsystem • Three Alternatives per Subsystem • Preliminary Subsystem Analyses • Decision Making Matrices with Weighting Factors to Select Best Subsystems • Preliminary Design Review & Report (PDR) • Detailed Subsystem & System Analyses (SolidWorks Cosmos Finite Element Analysis) • Critical Design Review & Report (CDR) • Component Fabrications and Part Procurements • Assembly • Testing and Troubleshooting • Final Presentation With the realistic constraints of: • Time • Budget • Space • Facilities


ME 481 & ME 482 Differences with PEEC/IKE-REIS Summer Program: The above are the processes that we follow in the ME 481 & 482 in two semesters with about 30 weeks meeting twice a week and 5 hours per week (i.e., 150 hrs); whereas during the PEEC/IKE-REIS summer we have 10 weeks but 5 times a week and 3 hrs per day, which gives again 150 hrs. Therefore, the PEEC/IKE-REIS Summer Program is in fact a crash course of ME 481 & 482 during summer, albeit, the senior design students have taken their junior courses in their discipline and are at the beginning of their 4th year in the University, but the PEEC/IKE-REIS students are basically at the beginning of their 3rd year and have not yet taken their junior courses in their discipline. Therefore, we accommodate these differences when we implement our design processes to our PEEC/IKE-REIS Summer Program. It should also be noted that many of the ME 481 & 482 projects are geared towards green technologies.

ME 213 Effects on PEEC/IKE-REIS Summer Program: ME 213 (Introduction to Engineering

Design) prepares students for the design projects and processes, is a scaled-down version of the senior design courses, and has the following attributes:

• Determination of the needs • Project Definition with Objectives • Project Planning (Gantt Chart) • Finance (Budgetting) • Background/Technology Search on Prior Art • Conceptualization • Brainstorming • Rapid Prototyping (SolidWorks Solid Modeling) • Preliminary Design Analyses • Decision Making Matrices with Weighting Factors to Select Best Design • Preliminary Design Review & Report (PDR) • Breakdown of the Concept/Design/System into Subsystem • Detailed Subsystem & System Analyses • Critical Design Review & Report (CDR) • Component Fabrications and Part Procurements • Assembly • Testing and Troubleshooting • Final Presentation With the realistic constraints of: • Time • Budget • Space • Facilities Therefore, the PEEC/IKE-REIS Project students come to us with the ME 213 preparation and go

through a version of ME 481 & ME 482 and become prepared for the University Courses and Projects. In addition, the PEEC/IKE-REIS project gives them the sense of pride in being able to complete an entire real-life project from scratch in 10 week, and the fact that their projects are challenging, are geared towards green technology, and are for real communities to help people. It should also be noted that many of the ME 213 projects are geared towards green technologies.


In addition, when the PEEC/IKE students are joined UHM, there are a number of sources of funds

and continuation of research activities are available to them, e.g., Josh Kaakua’s NHSEMP as well as REIS undergraduate research opportunities and the Senior Design Projects, to name a few.


Goal 2

A Community of Practice in Engineering: connecting Native Hawaiian students, mentors, and

undergraduate researchers with nurturing advising, through funded cohort experiences, quality curriculum, faculty/researchers, and community partners, through funded positions for students,

increased engagement with engineering issues and industries, and online communication strategies.

2.1 Objective 2.1


Figure 2: Logic Model for Objective 2.1

Three Summer Engineering Experiences (SEE) anchor the cohort experience for Native

Hawaiian students as they progress to successful UHMCOE transfer, degree completion, and engineering careers.


The analysis and assessment of Objective 2.1 will cover the following topics:

• Section 2.1.2: SEE Descriptions will explain each SEE program including program schedule, descriptions of engineering projects, cultural activities, student feedback, and program assessment. This section will be organized by:

o 2011 SEE Programs o 2012 SEE Programs

• Section 2.1.3: Hawaii Math Emporium Model section will describe the efforts to apply the math emporium model during the SEE1 and SEE2 summer programs. An assessment of the math emporium model, including success rates of students enrolled in the math emporium model and student feedback, will be summarized.

• Section 2.1.5: Evaluation of SEE Programs will quantitatively assess the impact of the SEE programs on student retention and success.

2.1.2 SEE Descriptions

Summer 2011 SEE1

The SEE1 program hosted at Kapiʻolani Community College extended for 6 weeks (June 13th – July 22nd, 2011), Monday through Friday. All students were enrolled in a college-level mathematics course focusing on Functions (Math 135), Trigonometry/Analytical Geometry (Math 140), Calculus I (Math 205), and Calculus II (Math 206).

Demographics

Table 20. SEE1 Demographics (2011)

Recruitment Campus Year Total

Students Male Female HON KAP LEE MAUI WIN

Summer 2011

15 9 6 0 14 0 0 1

June 1st, 2011: parent orientation. The Summer Bridge program is inspired by the support of the parents of all those students that participate in academic growth for Hawaii's future generations. This orientation allowed students and parents to come together with the KapCC STEM Program to discuss the goals and activities of the SEE1 program, encourage support and participation in the program, as well as build communication and relationships with students, parents, and families.


Program Description Daily Schedule: From 9am to 11:30am: Math Emporium - For 2.5 consecutive hours, students use a self-paced online program (MyMathlab) from Pearson Publishing. This “Mathematics Emporium” program has been designed and configured by 4 faculty members in Mathematics across the UH system (KapCC, HCC, WCC, and LCC) so that students address and master all the essential topics required to be successful in the engineering pathway (College Algebra, functions, and trigonometry, as well as Calculus). Students were provided with a laptop computer, and were assisted by mathematics instructors as well as peer mentors (with a ratio, on average, of 1 peer mentor for 4 students). This program supported active and independent learning through this self-paced system, in addition to thorough, immediate feedback from the instructors and peer mentors at all times during these daily 2.5 consecutive hours sessions. If students passed their course, they receive College credit for a 3-credit Pre-Calculus or 4-credit Calculus course.

Figure 3. SEE1 during their Math Emporium

From 11:30am to 12:00pm: Guest speakers were invited: The topics were selected to include curriculum information such as:

- counselors (to help students take courses in Fall 2011) - information about financial aid, - information about scholarships (START-UP, NSF S-STEM) - and also cultural information from Malama Hawai‘i, a program on campus that provides support to all students with a focus on indigenous Native Hawaiians. - guest speakers connecting science and culture: - Importance of and relationships between mathematics, physics and science using research on bees and the relationship with environment, agriculture, and the pollination of fruits and nuts (Kamuela Yong, University of Iowa). - Career opportunities for engineers, robotics spy bird, robot koi, and prosthetic limbs (Dr. Choi, Assistant Dean, UH Mānoa College of Engineering).


- Ocean waves: how they are created, and how they connect to mathematics and engineering (Neal Miyake from SPAWAR ―Space and Naval Warfare Systems Commandǁ). From 1pm to 4pm: Students learned the basics of Computer-Aided Design (CAD) using

SolidWorks, and basic physics concepts such as Faraday's law, wave theory (longitudinal and transversal), harmonics and frequency decomposition through the process of designing and building electric guitars. For the first two weeks, students learned the basic skills of SolidWorks; during the second week, they assembled a virtual electric guitar and designed their headstock. Throughout the last four weeks, students implemented their headstock design on their guitar neck, shaped their guitar body, sanded, sealed, and applied either wood finisher or paint. In the next stage of the process, students polished the curvature of their fret board, mounted it on their guitar neck and mounted the frets. Next, the pickups, electronics (soldering), grounding, saddle, bridge, nuts, and strings were installed. The final stage included the intonation, and tuning of their working guitars with the help of sound engineering software installed on their laptop. This project was made possible through the faculty training obtained in January 2011 for 3 KapCC faculty members made available by Tom Singer and Mike Aikens who conducted the workshop and whose project is NSF sponsored.

Figure 4. Students working on SolidWorks


Figure 5. Student working on sanding her electric guitar

2011 SEE1 Student Feedback On July 21, 2011, the SEE1 student survey was administered by the KCC summer program staff. The survey was developed by Dr. Hervé Collin of KCC with feedback from KCC STEM program coordinators. A total of 23 questions were developed. 20 questions were close-ended questions rating student satisfaction on various projects and 3 questions were open-ended questions.

93% (n=14) of the students who attended the KCC SEE1 program responded to the online survey.

The following summarizes the results of the survey (approved by University of Hawaii Institutional Review Board – CHS#19443):

1. SEE1 generally met or exceeded student expectations. Students generally had a positive

experience with the summer program at KCC. 86% of the students in SEE1 said that that SEE1 had either met or exceeded their expectations. 93% indicated that if it were in their power, they would choose another research experience.

2. Half of the students brought up concerns that the amount of time spent on the guitar building was not enough during SEE1. Additionally, the instructors indicated that the guitar construction had gone over schedule and they were not able to incorporate the connection to physics concepts as they originally planned. However, students generally were most positive toward the math emporium and guitar building activities both having approximately 93% of the students being satisfied with the respective activities.

3. The SolidWorks (CAD) activity had significantly less students being satisfied with the activity at 57% noting lack of clarity in the information that was taught and lack of one-on-one help from instructors and mentors. One student said that “There was a lot of things that weren’t taught clearly” and that “the packets [the instructor provided] helped to a very limited extent… spending my own to try to learn it was a pain at times.”


SEE2

The SEE2 Program was hosted at UH Maui College (UHMC) from May 16th – June 24th, 2011, Monday through Friday. All students were enrolled in upper-division mathematics courses focusing on Calculus I (Math 205) or Calculus II (Math 206).

The program was a residential program where students were housed with their fellow cohort members. Unfortunately, the UHMC dorms were not available for the 2011 SEE2 cohort, but they had accommodations at a house in Paia, Maui where they would take the public Maui Bus to the UHMC campus. Demographics


Year Total Students

Male Female HON KAP LEE MAN MAUI WIN

Summer 2011

13 10 3 0 6 2 1 0 4

Program Description

Daily Schedule: Monday-Thursday / 9:00am to 12:00pm: Math emporium Monday-Thursday / 3:30pm to 5:00pm: Optional Math emporium (catch up) Monday / 1:30pm to 3:30pm: Math emporium Tuesday-Thursday / 1:30pm to 3:30pm: hands-on engineering experiments Fridays / fields trips exposing students to industry and current Maui research sites

All students were enrolled in upper-division math courses including: Calculus I (11) and Calculus II (2). These courses were taught through the math emporium model as described previously.

Hands-On Engineering Projects and Experiments Electronics:

Students learned Ohm‘s law and used digital multimeters to measure resistance, current, and voltage; they also operated oscilloscopes. They built prototype breadboard oscillators with speakers and LEDs. They built transistors and capacitors with exponential voltage graphs and compared to calculus theory from their math class. They examined differentiator and integrator circuits and compared to theory from their calculus class. They soldered printed circuit boards. Mechanics:

Students were exposed to Shock packaging, airplane design, and truss mechanics (axial forces).


Robotics:

Figure 6. Robotics Competition

Figure 6 shows the students preparing to challenge their Lego robot they have worked on as a

part of their engineering project. This project provided a hands-on introduction to computers and computer programming using the LEGO MindStorms Systems. Programming language (NI LabView) concepts are introduced using languages that control a small NXT robot. Figure 7 is an example of one of the robots the students built.

Figure 7. Example of completed robot

The students used one light sensor on NXT Robot and wrote programs to trace a line. The

robot started from the line to be followed, facing it at a random angle. The robot detected when it reaches the line, then it started following it, continuing for at least one full turn.

Astronomical observations: Students were granted remote access to Faulkes North telescope located at the top of Haleakalā.


Fields trips to industry, various Maui research sites, and cultural sites: - Institute for Astronomy, Pukalani - AEOS (Advanced Electro-Optical System), Science City, Haleakalā; and - High Tech Park Companies (Akimeka, Boeing, Maui High Performance Computing

Center, Oceanit), Kihei. Students also visited important cultural sites and were involved in continuing and building

upon Hawai̒i cultural legacy. They learned about the historical site of Ko̒ ieʻie Fishpond in Kihei and helped rebuild the walls of the fishpond.

Figure 8. Ko̒ ieʻie Fishpond, Kihei, Maui

Figure 8 shows Native Hawaiian Culturist, Vene Chun, educates students of the history of the Hawaiian Islands, Maui and some of the Hawaiian legends. He also explained to the students the importance of the fishpond to the Native Hawaiians everyday lives, how it was engineered and maintained by ancient Hawaiians and its importance to our culture today.


Figure 9. Students participating in Ko̒ ieʻie Fishpond Restoration

Figure 10 shows the students restoring the Koʻieʻie Fishpond that was built over 500 years ago by Native Hawaiians. It is one of the last remaining fishponds in South Maui. The fishpond was previously maintained in the past under various prominent chiefs, including Kamehameha the Great’s direction.

Figure 10. Students at Ko̒ieʻie Fishpond

Students gain knowledge of how the tides and natural disasters affect the fishpond wall. They are also educated on how to effectively restore the wall based on this knowledge.


Figure 11. Kihei Canoe Club

Figure 11 shows students paddling out on a double-hulled canoe allowed students to explore

Maui and experience how the ancient Hawaiians voyaged to other islands. They were informed of the ancient Hawaiian techniques, rituals and navigation system. 2011 SEE2 Student Feedback

To gather student feedback, two student focus group sessions were conducted for SEE2 (IRB CHS#19468). There were eight (8) students present at all focus group sessions. The moderator also emailed a list of the focus group questions to students who did not make it to the focus group session with the chance to respond through email. Two (2) students replied with email responses. In total, there was 77% (10 students) participation through the focus groups or through email.

The students in SEE2 generally said that they would like to see engineering labs that incorporate more civil, mechanical, and electrical engineering and physics application. Many of the students noted that they have never been exposed to engineering courses and that many of their engineering and math lab projects had little or no direction or guidance from the instructor. This made their engineering labs challenging for the students.

SEE2 students also mentioned that the peer mentors available for help had a range of abilities and knowledge. The SEE2 students would only ask the help from one peer mentor. They suggest having peer mentors who have some teaching ability and having peer mentors assigned to help specific subjects (i.e. a peer mentor for Calculus 1, a peer mentor for Calculus 2). Since the students lived together in one house for the duration of SEE2, they commented that they would help each other and work together with their courses.

Several SEE2 students also commented about how most of the field trips that they took on Maui were geared towards astronomy and suggested having more field trips that are engineering based for the students. However, the field trips where students learned and were engaged in Native Hawaiian culture, were the ones the students enjoyed the most.


Students also suggested having an orientation on Oʻahu before they left for Maui because they typically did not know other students from other UH campuses. Most students said they would recommend the ʻIKE program at Maui College because of the opportunity to take a math course and the experience of being introduced to engineering concepts.

SEE3 The program extended for 12 weeks (5/23/11 - 8/13/11), Monday through Friday. All

students were enrolled in upper-division math courses which included: Calculus II (1), Calculus III (6), Calculus IV (6), Introduction to Differential Equations (4), and Linear Algebra & Differential Equations (3). These courses were taught through mainstream summer mathematics courses at UH Mānoa. The SEE3 program was a residential program at UHM. Students had the experience of living in the Hale Noelani Apartments on the UHM campus with their fellow cohort members. Students were placed in apartments together based on the math level they were enrolled in so that they could provide additional support and help to each other. Demographics


Year Total Students


Summer 2011

20 18 2 1 2 2 13 0 2

Program Description

All students participated in the following activities

- Workshops involving: Lab safety training, PowerPoint & presentations, SolidWorks modeling, Preliminary Design Review (PDR), Critical Design Review (CDR), resume review, advising, and Final Presentation.

- Undergraduate Research projects focusing on Renewable Energy & Island Sustainability. Students participate in the full engineering team design-build process including needs analysis, preliminary research, build decision making matrices, preliminary design review (PDR), critical design review (CDR), modeling, prototyping, scheduling, construction, testing and completion. The 3 projects students can choose to participate in are part of a complete renewable energy system.

a. Utility Terrain Vehicle (UTV) (8 students) b. Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) (4 students) c. Wind and Solar Power tower (WASP) (8 students)

Overview of the project

The program structure for this summer’s mentorship was based on the allocation of SEE3 students into three unique individual projects. Each project involved the students in the full process of developing a full product from planning to manufacturing to application, utilizing comprehensive engineering methods the entire way. The primary objective was to expose


students to the essential aspects of real-world engineering with real-world subject matter that can only be experienced through immersion in a team engineering development project. Program The engineering research and system development process that was taught to the students was a comprehensive tutorial on all planning, design, manufacturing, and management considerations that must be made as a project engineer. Students were expected to use these methods to exercise comprehensive decision making and critical problem solving. They prepared a preliminary design review (PDR) and a critical design review (CDR) that also allowed them to receive active feedback on their engineering practices and communications abilities. Through a structured timeframe involving a planning phase leading into a manufacturing phase, the mentors were able to actively monitor the students’ thinking processes and skills development. The teams must learn to manage their deadlines in this limited time frame. Each project must have its own budget accounted for and properly managed. Most importantly of all is the environment that allowed students to manage their own team, forcing them to allocate skills and experience and assist each other in further developing their skills and knowledge. There have been a number of resources made available in this program that students are normally not exposed to until their senior year, upper level courses. The students were taught to design all structural elements of their systems in the SolidWorks CAD program, as well as to utilize finite element analysis to optimize their designs. Manufacturing was done by the students themselves, allowing them to become familiar with techniques in advanced metal fabrication, machining, welding, and even constructing concrete foundation. Application The target application was focused on agricultural technology and environmental impact. Our finished product was used to furnish an individual farmer with the means to more efficiently operate his farm. Simultaneously he was provided a source of energy for recreation or emergency completely independent of the power grid. Within the scope of our environmental focus, attention was being drawn to Hawaii in particular; specifically the abundance of natural energy resources as well as the compelling needs for environmental preservation considerations. Project Descriptions The three projects included were the UAV Unmanned Arial Vehicle, the UTV Utility Vehicle, and the WASP "Wind and Solar Power" charging station. The key focus around which this entire program has been designed is the implementation of consumer scale, standalone, renewable energy systems. These three projects have been designed to be complete standalone systems that are fully complimentary of each other in the target application. Students learn the significance of engineering applications associated with sustainable energy and the renewable energy resources available to Hawaii. We selected a remote banana farm “Kahuku” (with a house within it), close to the Oahu’s North Shore (with a 5KW electricity needs). We then sized solar panels and a horizontal axis wind turbine to function as the renewable energy production sources. We also sized the batteries as the renewable energy storage system, with Charge Controller and Inverters to provide AC/DC Powers for the farm and the house with its utilities (WASP). We also designed and fabricated a plug-in all-terrain 4-wheel drive electric vehicle (UTV: Utility Vehicle) as well as an all-composites autonomous unmanned electric plane (UAV: Unmanned Aerial Vehicle: with a


remote communication camera on board) to work on the farm and provide air surveillance for the farm, as the farm has many areas with rugged terrains – making the farm independent of the grid and fossil fuels. The Kahuku Farm Project was a collaboration among REIS (Renewable Energy and Island Sustainability—funded by DOE), PEEC (Pre-Engineering Education Collaborative—funded by NSF), and NHSEMP (Native Hawaiian Science & Engineering Mentorship Program—funded by NSF) programs at the University of Hawaii and we had students from Mechanical Engineering, Electrical Engineering, and Civil and Environmental Engineering participated in this multi-disciplinary project. Twenty PEEC/IKE students participated in this project in summer 2011. WASP Wind/Solar Power Gathering system The WASP system involving 7 students was the centerpiece of the three systems. As its name indicates; it was the link between the natural, renewable energy resources, and the applicable, useable technologies being developed. The primary objective for this project was the development of a fully functional system capable of capturing and storing electrical energy by means of harvesting natural solar power and wind energy. The purpose of this system was to provide a model for a low-cost, complete, independent energy harvesting system that was finalized to be the infrastructure upon which other technologies can develop (such as the UTV and UAV). Students involved in this project were exposed heavily to the significance of this infrastructure-building process. They saw how many new technologies could be developed and made possible by providing this missing link between energy, cost, and availability. Solar Panels and Wind turbines gathered electrical energy, and it was up to the students to find the components and batteries that can manage and store the power for practical utility. Students designed and analyzed their own structure, source their own materials and components, then executed the manufacturing and assembly themselves. The practical skills that students have developed in this project ranged from metal fabrication and welding the structural tower to preparing the site and laying the foundation, utilizing sound engineering method and problems solving skills every step of the way. UTV Utility Vehicle

The UTV utility vehicle was the primary application oriented project involving 6 students. The vehicle and its design considerations served to show the students the process of implementing new technologies to enhance or modify the capabilities of existing systems. The end user would use such a vehicle to navigate large sections of farmland, haul equipment or move product. The application as well as the design of the vehicle itself was highly flexible. The aspect of the utility vehicle that made it most unique was the fact that it was electrically powered, allowing it to be charged by the WASP system completely independent of gasoline sources. Students working on this project went through design of every aspect of the vehicle from the ground up. Sub teams for the frame, drive-train, and suspension of the vehicle were expected to design and analyze their components for a number of driving conditions, making these students very adept at executing finite element analysis techniques using both SolidWorks and ANSYS programs. Once designs have been finalized students underwent the process of ordering new parts, or sourcing used parts. The practical skills developed in this project were significant, as students must learn to retrofit and maintain old parts, then modify them to work with new


systems. Advanced metal fabrication techniques, welding, machining, and general automotive assembly/maintenance skills are all developed in the course of this project. UAV Unmanned Aerial Vehicle The UAV Unmanned Aerial Vehicle involved 4 students in the design and construction of a remote controlled, autonomous capable aerial platform. The UAV provided the end-user with the ability to monitor and map out his/her own lands and crops as well as survey new land. This system was highly complementary to the WASP and UTV as it also utilized electrical power, and it supplemented the UTV in managing large areas of land.

The team developing the UAV became very familiar with the electrical power, propulsion, and control systems involved with a standard remote controlled plane. They then learned to implement more sophisticated systems such as autonomous control and navigation, and high quality video capture. The system required somewhat less fabrication and construction, but was heavily focused on building electrical systems, programming software, and making modifications to an existing platform. Results and other Activities Students presented their work at the end of the summer as well as their prototype and video of their work which can be found at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_aFxOR3j4k. Students were also exposed to cultural knowledge. They have participated in Community outreach projects with Kako̒o Oiwi, He̒eia Wetland Restoration in Kaneohe, HI, as well as participated in the Summer Huakaʻi which focused on the sacred sites of Oʻahu. 2011 SEE3 Student Feedback

To gather student feedback, two student focus group sessions were conducted for SEE3(IRB CHS#19468). There were 12 students present at all focus group sessions (60% participation of the total SEE3 students). The moderator also emailed a list of the focus group questions to students who did not make it to the focus group session with the chance to respond through email. No students from SEE3 chose to submit their input through email.

Students in SEE3 indicated that they felt their internship experience was demanding and time consuming. The students felt that they would have benefited from having several more weeks to work on their projects. Students were spending long hours in the mechanical engineering lab to complete their projects on time. They felt that the entire design process moved too quickly over the duration of SEE3.

Alternatively, students said that much of their time issue can be dealt with by having a project that is feasible over the 10-week program period. However, students consistently noted that their internship gave them intensive exposure to engineering design and fabrication experience and that they learned a lot in the 10-week program.

The SEE3 students felt that there was not enough emphasis on the math course portion of the summer program. Many suggested having a balance between their math courses and their engineering projects. However, because the students were housed in the same dorm building and with students in their math courses, they were able to reach out for help from their peers.

The summer Huakaʻi which focused on the sacred sites of Oʻahu, was the most enjoyable activity that the students had during the summer. They were able to take a break from working


on their engineering projects and their math course and were able to immerse themselves in Hawaiian culture.

Many students felt that their expectations were either met or exceeded saying that they had not expected to work on such a large scale project where they would learn engineering processes in depth and detail. 25% of the SEE3 students changed their majors (most to mechanical engineering) as a result of the SEE3 program. Most students said they would recommend the ʻIKE program at Mānoa and voluntarily inquired about participating in the program again.

Summer 2012 SEE1 The SEE1 program hosted at Kapiʻolani Community College extends for 6 weeks (June 18th,

2012 – July 27th, 2012), Monday through Friday. All students were enrolled in a college-level mathematics course focusing on Functions (Math 135), Trigonometry/Analytical Geometry (Math 140), Calculus I (Math 205), and Calculus II (Math 206). Demographics


Recruitment Campus Year Total

Students Male Female HON KAP LEE MAUI WIN

Summer 2011

15 9 6 0 14 0 0 1

Summer 2012

22 18 4 1 18 0 2 1

May 11th, 2012: Parent/Student Orientation. The orientation was held for SEE1 participants from Maui at the UH Maui College. Because two students are originally from Maui, they were placed in housing at the Hale Mānoa dorms at the University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa campus. Students commute to and from KapCC using the city bus system. June 7th, 2012: Parent/Student Orientation. The orientation was held for SEE1 participants from O̒ ahu at the KapCC STEM Center. This orientation allows students and parents to come together with the KapCC STEM Program to discuss the goals and activities of the SEE1 program, encourage support and participation in the program, as well as build communication and relationships with students, parents, and families. Program Description The SEE1 program is held Monday through Friday from 9AM to 4PM. The daily schedule consisted of: Monday – Friday


9:00am – 11:55am Math Emporium - This “Mathematics Emporium” program has been designed by 5 faculty members in Mathematics across the UH system (KapCC, WCC, LCC, HCC, and UHM) so that students address and master all the essential topics required to be successful in the engineering pathway (College Algebra, functions, and trigonometry, as well as Calculus I, and II). Students are provided with a laptop computer, and are assisted by mathematics instructors as well as peer mentors (with a ratio, on average, of 1 peer mentor for 5 students). This program supports active and independent learning through this self-paced system, in addition to thorough, immediate feedback from the instructors and peer mentors at all times during these daily 3 consecutive hours sessions. If students pass their course, they receive College credit for a 3-credit Pre-Calculus or 4-credit Calculus course. Monday – Thursday 1:00pm – 4:00pm Engineering Projects – Students are given the opportunity to build their own electric guitars for the first four to five weeks of the summer program. This is the same engineering project that the SEE1 program put on during the previous summer bridge (2011). During this summer bridge (2012), the SolidWorks portion of the lesson has been scaled down and reduced to demonstration only to allow for more time in building the guitars, and the tuning of their working guitars. The last week of the program is devoted to research and demonstrations of students’ understanding of the physics concepts such as Faraday’s law, wave theory (longitudinal and transversal), harmonics and frequency decomposition relating to the electric guitars. Students will be put in groups and will be assigned a topic. They will create a poster displaying their work and will present it to the rest of their peers. Friday 1:00pm – 4:00pm Huakaʻi (Field Trips) – The students will have the chance to visit to

• H-Power Waste-to-Energy Conversion, Honouliuli Wastewater Recycling Facility o Through this experience, students realized the engineering involved in cleaning

and recycling water in Hawai`i. As important, they had the opportunity to relate such process to the concept of water in the Hawaiian culture.

• loko i̒ a with Paepae o Heʻeia o SEE1 students were exposed to the original building strategies of fish ponds in

Hawaii; specifically the physics of water flow in and out of the pond as well as the biological consequences on fish growth and selection. They were actively engaged in the traditional Hawaiian civil engineering methods, and participated in the rebuilding of a portion of the fish pond wall.

• Sailing canoes with staff of Kanehunamoku/Mana Maoli o Students learned some traditional Hawaiian sailing strategies on canoe sailing,

and were engaged in the comparison of such techniques with the physics of sailing used by modern boat technologies.

• Honolulu Community College’s MELE studio and CTE program.


Figure 12. Peer Mentor and ʻIKE student during the Math Emporium session (Photo Credit: Aaron Halemano)

Figure 13. Students helping each other during the Math Emporium session (Photo Credit: Aaron Halemano)


Figure 14. ʻIKE Students visiting the H-Power Waste-to-Energy Conversion and the Honouliuli Wastewater Recycling

Facility in Honolulu (Photo Credit: Aurora Kagawa)

Figure 15. Sanding Guitar Bodies (Photo Credit: Aurora Kagawa)


Figure 16. Carving and wood burning of guitar body using Polynesian tattoo style (Photo Credit: Aurora Kagawa and

Aaron Halemano)

Figure 17. Mounting the frets onto the fretboard (Photo Credit: Aurora Kagawa)

Challenges in 2011 Some of the challenges that have been encountered during the SEE1 program include:

• Too much time spent on CAD, which caused a reduction of time spent on the physics learning activities devoted to the guitar building activity.

Revisions From Summer 2011

• SolidWorks portion of guitar building has been scaled down and reduce to demonstration only. Sanding power tools have been purchased in order to speed up this portion of the building process and allow more time in physic learning activities as well as intonation, tuning and learning how to play the guitar.


• Instead of lecturing about the physics concepts relating to guitars, students will be researching themselves, learning about these topics, and will be asked to present their work to the rest of their peers.

2012 SEE1 Student Feedback An evaluation at the end of the SEE1 program will be conducted. Students will participate in a short survey about their experience and will be followed by a number of focus group sessions. Our evaluation has not been conducted and/or compiled yet when this report was written, but it will be included in next year’s report.

SEE2 The SEE2 Program hosted at UH Maui College (UHMC) extended for 6 weeks (May 20th,

2012 – June 30th, 2012), Monday through Friday. One mathematics instructor and one peer mentor (UHMC) were present. Two other peer mentors were available during various portions of the SEE2 program, but not the entire duration of SEE2. All students were enrolled in upper-division mathematics courses focusing on Calculus I (Math 205), Calculus II (Math 206), or Calculus III (Calculus 231).

The SEE2 program is a residential program at UHMC. Students had the experience of living in the Kulanaa̒o Apartments, near the UHMC, with their fellow cohort members. Demographics


Year Total Students


Summer 2011

13 10 3 0 6 2 1 0 4

Summer 2012

24 16 8 1 6 5 8 2 2

May 4th, 2012: Student Orientation. Orientation meeting at KCC STEM Center for students on Oahu. The orientation meeting provided an introduction for SEE2 students and SEE2 student coordinator. Provided an opportunity for students to gain a better understanding of SEE2 and have any questions they may have answered. Students were provided with information for SEE2 such as preparation, travel, activities, math course, engineering class, scheduling, lodging, registration, etc. This assisted in preparation for students prior to traveling to Maui.


Figure 18. Chanelle Sakamoto (SEE2 Coordinator) going over the SEE2 information with student participants at

orientation (Photo Credit: Chanelle Sakamoto-Falces).

Figure 19. SEE2 Students from 3 campuses attended the orientation (Photo Credit: Chanelle Sakamoto-Falces).

May 20th, 2012: Welcome meeting. Following check-in at the airport upon students’ arrival on Maui, a welcome meeting was conducted at the students lodging location. This assisted students’ in asking any questions they may have upon arrival and for the SEE2 student coordinator to assist in any challenges the students’ have had thus far. Student received a welcome packet with important information including contact numbers, shopping, medical facilities, bus transportation, etc. A review of student conduct code, special first week schedule for students and the program agreement was also discussed. The welcome meeting assisted students in getting setup and provided an opportunity to address any concerns.

Program Description


The SEE2 program was held Monday through Friday from 8:45am to 3:30pm. The daily schedule for SEE2 consisted of: Monday 8:45am – 12:10pm: Math 1:30pm – 3:30pm: Math Tuesday – Thursday 8:45am – 12:10pm: Math 1:30pm – 4:00pm: Engineering Friday Activity/Field Trip Day (Times Vary) Monday – Thursday 8:45am – 12:10pm 1 Mathematics instructor (UHMC) and 3 peer mentors (1 full-time, 2 part-time, all from UHMC) were present. All students were enrolled in upper-division Mathematics courses and participated in supplementary activities. There were: 10 Calculus I, 3 Calculus 2, and 11 Calculus 3 students. 6 weekly tests were given to them with the lowest test score dropped for each student. Sample tests were given to them and we went over those sample tests in class with them. As of the third week, more examples were provided through weekly example sheets (on top of the sample tests), so that the students could see more examples and be able to interact with the teaching team, participate in discussions, ask more questions, and more importantly be better prepared for their tests. Tuesday – Thursday 1:30pm – 3:30pm Engineering Projects - The first project focused on building and using the LETRY car. The LETRY car consists of two engines, two battery compartments, and a bread board. Items for placement on the bread board included a relay, a CMOS inverting buffer, an infrared LED, infrared phototransistor, a 555, and various other passives. The car was built in stages, verifying that the circuit was working by noting the conditions of the LEDs and motors. A scope was not used at this stage. There were discussions on the nature of electricity and it's properties, and analogies to known physical phenomena. As an example, voltage was compared to water pressure, and resistance was compared to water pipes of differing diameters. The 555 was a separate lesson. It was discussed how the capacitor acts as reservoir (literally), filling, and then discharging, and R1 acts as a pipe, limiting the current, and therefore the rate at which the reservoir is filled. Students created several one shots and astable circuits attached to LEDs, and noted the effect of larger and smaller resistor and cap values. There was demonstration utilizing the 555 as a variable PWM source to control a DC motor. This was done via an astable to set the frequency, a monostable to set the duty cycle, an inverter to invert the duty cycle from greater than 50% to less than 50%, and finally a transistor as a switch to a larger voltage source. Students scoped the various stages, and attached the circuit to a DC motor. Students also observed 25V spikes from the motor (the battery pack was 6 volts) and then snuffed the spikes with a diode across the engine terminals. A similar circuit was created for controlling servo motors, and it attached to a tank chassis; demonstrating forward, reverse and halt with different duty cycles. The final official LETRY circuit turned on one


engine, while controlling the polarity of the other engine via a relay, controlled by a light sensor. This was used to avoid obstacles, but only from one side. By combining kits, the students could avoid obstacles from both sides. This proved a popular circuit with the students, as they spent long hours to get it working. Students experimented by utilizing the hallway corridors as a track, which has black and white tiling. They pointed the light sensors downward and line followed the black/white interface. As this was successful, students then experimented with increasing the voltage of the engine circuit, from 1.5, to 3, 6, and 9 volts. This ended our experiments with the LETRY cars. The LETRY cars were a good precursor to the lead lag circuits that were taught in the later weeks of the program. The instructor provided an electronic demonstration ready for students prior to engineering class. This purpose was to show them how the items in their car could be used outside of class. Here is a partial list of what was reviewed:

• Using a light sensor circuit to turn a night light off and on. Students were able to use this circuit to control the LETRY car.

• A pan tilt platform controlled via a joystick through a micro controller. This led to discussions of how potentiometers and switches work. Also, foreshadowed demonstration of 555 controlling servo. This was popular among most students.

• Output of electric guitar into an oscilloscope. Wave frequency change corresponds to audible pitch. Shape of wave changes depending on where string is plucked, and corresponds to timbre.

• Simple doorbell circuit (using switch and led) is demonstrated. Then switch and led are decoupled with arduino, so that switch controls signal, not current flow. Then switch gets own micro controller, and light gets own micro controller, and they are connected with signal wires. Finally Bluetooth radios are used to replace wires, and switch and light are separated. This also was popular.

• Took the LETRY circuit and attached it to a larger car chassis. The physical wiring was done by two sets of students with minimal supervision. Students showed their interest and creativity as they produced this idea and was able to manufacture the idea.

• Sensor night light. Light turns on in darkness, but only lasts for a designated amount of time, but switches off if lights turn on.

• Controlling LED brightness via PWM. Again, this was done with a 555. Then, it was done again using an arduino.

Students also built passive integration and differentiation RC circuits and gained experience utilizing the oscilloscopes. Students practiced on the "test signal" which is used for testing scope probes and also practiced on the signal generators. Discussion on what was expected of the "integration" of a square to look like, and its differential with respect to time. After building and scoping the circuits, students were able to verify that they integrated and differentiated. Other topics of discussion were with "light" calculus and sine waves and triangle waves. This assisted with the integration and application of math and engineering. Students were introduced to basic concepts of LabView programming language and robotic applications for multifunction part manipulation and motion with motors. They studied topics related to robot design including motion planning with motors and sensing using the different types of sensors like light, touch, ultrasonic, and sound. Finally, they experienced laboratory hands-on applications: they built robots using Mind Storm LEGO parts, controlled robots using


the LabView program language and NXT controller, and participated in a tunnel contest. The contest introduced the basic of LabVIEW programming using an NXT two-motor car. The activities are designed to be done as a single unit, with the students working at their own pace, receiving help from the instructor as needed. This project provides a hands-on introduction to computers and computer programming using the LEGO MindStorms Systems. Programming language (NI LabView) concepts are introduced using languages that control a small NXT robot. The students use one light sensor on NXT Robot and write programs to trace a line. Friday Various Times Huakai (Field Trips) Students participated in an activity or field trip exposing students to industry, Native Hawaiian culture, and current Maui research sites:

• Pacific Whale Foundation Molokini Wild Side Eco-Adventure: This snorkel tour addressed issues concerning the damaged coral reefs and the pollution of our natural resources here in Hawaii. A Naturalists was on-board to raise awareness as well as discuss the impacting role of how the climate changes and global temperatures affect the world’s marine environment.

• Maui Ocean Center: This Hawaiian aquarium provides understanding of Hawaii’s seas and our Hawaiian culture based on a quarter century of research. Ocean naturalists were able to share their insight through many of the different presentations that were held at the various exhibits throughout the center.

• Maui Wastewater Treatment Tour: Students learned the infrastructure of the wastewater plant on Maui; 5 reclamation facilities, 42 pump stations, 222 miles of county maintained gravity transmission lines. Tour of the facility and explanation of the treatment process was followed by a briefing and a short video to give an introduction on what is involved in managing and maintaining a wastewater treatment plant. It was discussed how engineering is directly related to the treatment plant and what the visions for the future look like as the population in Hawaii increases.

• Maui Economic Development Board (MEDB): The students toured 4 companies in the Maui Research and Technology Park. Students toured the Maui High Performance Computing Center (MHPCC), Boeing Co., Ardent and the Pacific Disaster Center (PDC). In addition, MEDB also presented the Women in Technology Presentation to the students, which informed them of the opportunities and assistance for minorities and women in the industry.

• Hawaiian Commercial & Sugar Company (HC&S): Introduction and history of the industry generated many questions and interest of the students. Discussion on how engineering and our culture is and has been an important factor in the production, maintenance and operation of the company peaked students interest further. Students were able to experience a tour of the facility that is not offered to the public, and witness first hand the extent of the operations of the company. Some of the topics covered were harvesting techniques, hydropower generation and irrigation.

• Iao Valley State Park: Students were able to leisurely tour a historical landmark on the island of Maui while enjoying lunch. Iao Valley holds many of our culture and spiritual values that is evident as soon as you enter the park. It is also the site of the battle of Kepaniwai of 1790 where forces were led by Kamehameha I and Kalanikupule. This


battle is known as one of the most bitter battles fought in Hawaiian history. This battle was also important in the unification of Hawaii.

• Leisure stroll and dinner in historic Lahaina town and `Ulalena (A Story of Hawaii’s People) production. Students were able to have free time to stroll the boardwalk, shop and have dinner in Maui’s historic Lahaina town. Followed by attending the award winning production, `Ulalena, that told the story of Hawaii’s mythology, legends and history through theatrics.

Figure 20: SEE2 students involved in a step-by-step review and discussion of a specific technique (Photo Credit: Chanelle

Sakamoto-Falces).

Figure 21: LETRY being assembled (Photo Credit: Chanelle Sakamoto-Falces).


Figure 22: Testing our the LETRY on an improvised track (Photo Credit: Chanelle Sakamoto-Falces).

Figure 23: Molokini straight ahead (Photo Credit: Chanelle Sakamoto-Falces).

Figure 24: Learning about Hawaiian Sugar cane processing methods (Photo Credit: Chanelle Sakamoto-Falces).


Figure 25: MAUI wastewater Treatment Facility (Photo Credit: Chanelle Sakamoto-Falces).

Figure 26: SEE2 students experiencing `Ulalena

Figure 27: SEE2 students!


• Calculus III was not available last year and limited the amount of students to calculus I and II.



• Huaka̒i (field trip) have been planned to incorporate different types of engineering fields to give students a full picture of engineering opportunities.

• SEE2 offers Calculus I through III. In Summer 2011, only Calculus I and II were offered. Also a new math instructor has been assigned and has been working closely with the PEEC faculty on O̒ahu regarding the math emporium model.

• The Emporium model has been extended to support Calculus III and has been implemented for the first time in SEE2 in 2012 allowing a greater number of student enrollment into the summer program at a higher math level.

2012 SEE2 Student Feedback An evaluation at the end of the SEE2 program will be conducted. Students will participate in a short survey about their experience and will be followed by a number of focus group sessions. Our evaluation has not been conducted and/or compiled yet when this report was written, but it will be included in next year’s report.

SEE3 The program extended for 10 weeks (6/3/12 – 8/11/12). All students were enrolled in upper-

division math courses which included: Calculus IV (7) and Linear Algebra & Differential Equations (12). These courses were taught through mainstream summer mathematics courses at UH Mānoa.

The SEE3 program was a residential program at UHM. Students had the experience of living

in the Hale Noelani Apartments on the UHM campus with their fellow cohort members. Students were placed in apartments together based on the math level they were enrolled in so that they could provide additional support and help to each other.

Demographics

Table 25. SEE3 Demographics (2012) Year Total

Students Male Female HON KAP LEE MAN MAUI WIN

Summer 2011

20 18 2 1 2 2 13 0 2

Summer 2012

19 15 4 0 6 0 9 0 4


Program Description

All students participated in the following activities

- Workshops involving: Lab safety training, PowerPoint & presentations, SolidWorks modeling, Preliminary Design Review (PDR), Critical Design Review (CDR), resume review, advising, Papākolea Community Curriculum, and Final Presentation.

- Undergraduate Research projects focusing on Renewable Energy & Island Sustainability. Students participate in the engineering team design-build process including needs analysis, preliminary research, build decision making matrices, preliminary design review (PDR), critical design review (CDR), scheduling, budgeting, procurement, construction, testing and completion. The 2 primary projects this year are:

1. Project Kamakani: Papākolea Wind Turbine

• The target application, for 2012, is to utilize renewable energy solutions to benefit the Native Hawaiian community. The Project Kamakani Wind Turbine project is being completed in partnership with the Department of Hawaiian Homelands and the Papākolea Community Development Center to assist the Native Hawaiian community center to achieve their energy reduction and dependence goals.

2. Creative Engineering Design Suite (CEDS) • The Creative Engineering Design Suite (CEDS) project is a design-build project

to develop a STEM Learning Center to be used by ‘Ike students during the academic year.

Overview of the project

The 2012 SEE3 program structure involved many of the same mentors and design process identified in 2011 SEE3. Each project involves the students in the full process of developing a full product from planning to manufacturing to application, utilizing comprehensive engineering methods the entire way. The primary objective is to expose students to the essential aspects of real-world engineering with real-world subject matter that can only be experienced through immersion in a team engineering development project.

Program

The engineering research and system development process that is taught to the students is a comprehensive tutorial on all planning, design, manufacturing, and management considerations that must be made as a project engineer. Students are expected to use these methods to exercise comprehensive decision making and critical problem solving. They will prepare a preliminary design review (PDR) and a critical design review (CDR) that will also allow them to receive active feedback on their engineering practices and communications abilities. Through a structured timeframe involving a planning phase leading into a manufacturing phase, the mentors will be able to actively monitor the students’ thinking processes and skills development. The teams must learn to manage their deadlines in this limited time frame. Each project must have its own budget accounted for and properly managed. Most importantly of all is the environment that allows students to manage their own team, forcing them to allocate skills and experience and assist each other in further developing their skills and knowledge.


There will be a number of resources made available in this program that students are normally not exposed to until their senior year, upper level courses. The students will be taught to design all structural elements of their systems in the SolidWorks CAD program, as well as to utilize finite element analysis to optimize their designs. Manufacturing is done by the students themselves, allowing them to become familiar with techniques in advanced metal fabrication, machining, welding, and even constructing concrete foundation.

Project Kamakani wind Turbine Project The Project Kamakani Wind Turbine Project is a real-world consult-design-build project

SEE3 students will perform for the Native Hawaiian community: The Papākolea Project is a collaboration among REIS, ʻIKE, and Native Hawaiian Science &

Engineering Mentorship programs at the University of Hawaii and we have students from Mechanical Engineering, Electrical Engineering, and Civil and Environmental Engineering participated in this multi-disciplinary project. This project is also a partnership with the Department of Hawaiian Homelands, the quasi-autonomous government agency that manages residential, agricultural, and pastoral awards for Native Hawaiian families. The project site is the Papākolea Community Center, the only urban Native Hawaiian homestead area. The long term goal of the Papākolea Community Center is to reduce its energy usage to Net-zero with a mix of Photovoltaic technology, LED lighting, and other energy solutions. In order to support their initiatives, SEE3 students are going to re-apply some of the D3 projects implemented in the Kahuku farm here at the Papākolea Community Center with Off-Grid and Smart Grid-Tie capabilities. Specifically, this year, The 2012 SEE3 project involves managing the scheduling, budget, procurement, and design of a 1.0 kW grid-tied wind turbine system. The project will involve meeting with members of the community, electrical contractors, and other project partners to select a best-fit solution.

Figure 28: Overview of the setup SEE3 students will implement.

STEM Learning Center: Creative Engineering Design Suite (CEDS) Currently there is a shortage of space on campus for engineering students to have access to

engineering computing resources, meet with tutors, and study with peers. SEE3 students will have the opportunity to transform a former electrical engineering laboratory into a dedicated


learning space for minority STEM students. SEE3 students will design and implement their vision for a student-run, student-centered learning center and give themselves a higher sense of ownership of the resource environment. The vision is to create a “high-utility learning environment that optimizes student achievement, engagement, and creativity.”

The students apply the same design-build methodology to the STEM learning center project. Teams of students focus on subsystems such as computer and equipment hardware, software, and furnishings. Computer aided models of the designs allow students to brainstorm and revise their designs. SolidWorks software is initially used for the design of the space using 8 custom-built water-cooled, powerful computer systems specific to such engineering applications. Project management skills including adhering to budget, schedule, and scope are emphasized to renovate, and implement the Creative Engineering Design Suite before the Fall semester begins.

Figure 29: Solidworks rendering of the newly designed CEDS


Figure 30: original space

Figure 31: SEE3 students in action!


Figure 32: 2012 SEE 3 cohort


• Students were separated across many Mathematics courses: Calculus II (MATH 242), Calculus III (MATH 243), Calculus IV (MATH 244), Introduction to Differential Equations (MATH 302), and Linear Algebra/Differential equations (MATH 307). Students felt that if they had more of their colleagues in their class, they would be a stronger resource for each other.

• In 2011 all SEE3 mentors fulfilled a range of duties including research, design, academic, tutoring, and counseling. Observations were that while students excelled at engineering projects in the lab some students also needed more specific guidance on the academic load. Mentors had a difficult time assessing how students were doing in the classroom when their primary contact with them was in the lab.


• The Mathematics courses offered this year were Calculus IV (MATH 242), and Linear Algebra/Differential equations (MATH 307) only. This choice was made to address students’ feedback from the 2011 cohort and attempt to strengthen the cohesion of the SEE3 cohort.

• In order to address the difficulties of SEE3 mentor to address all the SEE3 students needs (academic as well as engineering project supervision and guidance), the program was revised to have specific academic mentors for the math courses, independent from the mentors supporting the cohort in research projects.

2012 SEE3 Student Feedback


An evaluation at the end of the SEE3 program will be conducted. Students will participate in a short survey about their experience and will be followed by a number of focus group sessions. Our evaluation has not been conducted and/or compiled yet when this report was written, but it will be included in next year’s report.


2.1.3 Hawaii Math Emporium Model (HMEM)

Description of the model

The traditional math courses in the whole UH CC system suffer from the common problem of low success rates. In the attempt to help students be Calculus-ready when they enter our College as STEM majors, an Emporium type of model (inspired by Virginia Tech, Cleveland State Community College, Louisiana State University, the University of Alabama, and the University of Idaho) has been adopted.

This program has been designed and configured with the combined effort of 5 faculty members in Mathematics across the UH system (KapCC, WCC, LCC, HCC, and UHM) so that students address and master all the essential topics required to be successful in the Engineering pathway (College Algebra, functions, Trigonometry, as well as Calculus). These mathematics faculty members worked from Fall 2010 to Spring 2012 semesters to evaluate available math software programs and adapt the curriculum for the 5 levels of math (Pre-Calculus (Elementary Functions and Trigonometry/Analytic Geometry), Calculus 1, 2, and 3) offered in the SEE programs at KapCC and UHMC in Summer 2011 and 2012.

Students are provided with a laptop computer, and assisted by mathematics instructors as well as peer mentors. Students use a self-paced online program (MyMathlab), but are also encouraged to work collaboratively in teams and with their peer mentors as well as with their faculty mentors/coaches. This program supports an active and independent learning through this self-paced system, in addition to a significant amount of immediate feedback from the instructors and peer mentors at all times during these daily sessions. When students determine they have mastered a topic, quizzes assess their competency and build their confidence as they progress. Social learning and peer collaboration in concert with faculty mentors/coaches are keys to success.

During the HMEM program, Native Hawaiian students are required to perform the following sequence of tasks for each chapter:

1. Series of required tutorials

• This set of tutorials includes videos, powerpoint presentations, and interactive tutorials. Students are required to go over all the material before taking the assessment (diagnostic tool), which will identify students’ level of comprehension.

2. Assessment

• Once students complete the set of tutorials, they are able to take the diagnostic tool. The questions are chosen so that all the topics are covered. In order to mitigate guessing, multiple sets of questions address the same topics, and all must be completed successfully for the topic to be considered mastered.


3. Homework

• Based on the outcome of the diagnostic tool, students are faced with a series of homework assignments to complete in order to help them review or learn the topics categorized as “not mastered” by the assessment tool. Throughout the process of completing the homework, students have access to complementary explanations and examples from the book, “Ask the Instructor” feature (allowing them to send specific question directly to the faculty member), and “Help me solve this” which is a computer-based system designed to assess students’ problems and provide step-by-step support to resolve them. They also have the opportunity to consult faculty members and mentors present during these sessions as well as their peers sitting in close proximity.

4. Quizzes

• Short comprehensive quizzes are also implemented and are more focused on helping students demonstrate their understanding of mathematical concepts using words and written argument rather than solving typical problems (as in the homework sets).

5. Tests

• At the end of each chapter, students are asked to demonstrate their understanding of the concepts and methods learned and practiced during the homework period. If students do not score with a minimum required score at the end-of-chapter assessment, peer mentors are assigned specifically to them for several days. Together, they revisit the identified weak subjects, and students are allowed to retake the exam whose questions content is slightly consolidated to a higher level (SEE1). In addition, a cumulative final exam is given at the end of the program to provide students with the opportunity to demonstrate their overall understanding of the concepts and techniques learned throughout the six-week program.

6. One-on-one meetings

• Half way through the six-week program, the instructor meets with every student, which provides the opportunity for students to express their concerns, challenges, and success.

The HMEM program is a self-paced program allowing students to bring their mathematics level up to Calculus during the SEE1 summer bridge, and allowing students in SEE2 to advanced in their Calculus curriculum. The cohort model and spirit have also been incorporated into HMEM. Tests at the end of each chapter are given at common times into the program for all students. However, for students whose pace is faster than others, tests are given earlier. This choice has been made to allow these faster students to help their peers in addition to peer mentors and faculty members present during the sessions. Similarly, when students are falling behind, they are identified by the faculty member who then assigns mentors specifically to these students to


help them overcome their challenges. This aspect of the model consolidates social bonding and strengthens peer interactions during the program in order for students to know each other and maintain these relationships as they continue their college curriculum during subsequent semesters. This is a unique and crucial part of the HMEM program.

In order to consolidate the cohort model, students are also physically positioned in groups by math levels. This treatment is applied in order to facilitate and enhance peer mentors’ as well as faculty members’ efforts who are able to provide mini lectures to a group of students when necessary.

In 2012, small white boards have been used extensively by peer mentors when clarifying techniques and concepts with the students. From time to time ̒ IKE students also make use of these boards.

Challenges and improvements

Several challenges were encountered in Summer 2011, identified and acted upon in Summer 2012 to improve the efficacy of the HMEM program.

• The 1 to 5 ratio of peer mentors to students proved to be ideal and be kept every year. • The Pre-Calculus curriculum, which encompasses functions (including Polynomials, and

Trigonometric), rational and exponential functions may to be too heavy for the students to be completed within a six-week program. We therefore decided to break it into two separate courses and aligned them with the curriculum employed at the UH system: MATH 135 and MATH 140.

• Mini lectures for small groups of students were inserted when appropriate. Seating students in groups by level allowed us to implement this activity.

• Tutorials are now required as the first step of the program; in 2011, this step was optional and caused students to take much longer to complete each chapter.

• More frequent assessments were instituted. In 2011, two chapters were combined. In 2012, a test was given after each chapter.

In the future, several treatments will be developed for 2013 HMEM:

• Creation of portfolio using tablets. The purpose of these portfolios is to provide instructors a mechanism to collect written work and projects to help students practice writing math.

• Insertion of small applied projects so that students can apply and contextualize recently learned mathematical tools and techniques.


SEEs Success Rates

The table below shows the math course success rates during the Summer 2011 SEE programs. SEE1 (KAPCC) and SEE2 (Maui College) implemented the math emporium during Summer 2011. Because of the wide range of math levels, students at SEE3 (Mānoa) were registered in mainstream math courses offered by UH Mānoa.

Table 26. SEE Math Course Success Rates by SEEs


Success Rate

SEE1 (KAPCC) 12 15 80.0%

MATH 135(1) 1 1 100.0% MATH 140 (1) 9 9 100.0% MATH 205 (1) 1 1 100.0% MATH 206 (1) 1 1 100.0%

None(2) 0 3 0.0% SEE2 (Maui College) 13 13 100.0%

MATH 205 (1) 11 11 100.0% MATH 206 (1) 2 2 100.0%

SEE3 (Manoa) 16 20 80.0% MATH 242 0 1 0.0% MATH 243 4 7 57.1% MATH 244 5 5 100.0% MATH 302 4 4 100.0% MATH 307 3 3 100.0%

Grand Total 41 48 85.4% (1) Courses taught through emporium (2) Three (3) students did not test in to a minimum Math 135.

Table 27 summarizes the success rates over the ʻIKE summer programs.

Table 27. Overall SEE Math Success Rates

Overall Success Rate (SEE1 + SEE2 + SEE3)

Emporium Success Rate (SEE1 + SEE2)

Traditional Math Course Success Rate (SEE3)

Summer 2011 85% 89% 80%


Summer 2011 Comparison to Fall 2011 Success Rates

Table 28 is a summary of the math course success rate comparisons between SEE Summer 2011 and Fall 2011.

Table 28. PEEC Course Success Rates (Summer vs. Semester)

Summer 2011 Fall 2011

(All Students) Fall 2011

(Native Hawaiian ONLY)

Successful

Completers Attempters Success

Rate Success Rate Success Rate

SEE1 12 15 80.0%

MATH 135(1) 1 1 100.0%

MATH 140 (1) 9 9 100.0% 60.0% 56.9%

MATH 205 (1) 1 1 100.0% 68.4% 55.6%

MATH 206 (1) 1 1 100.0% 64.5% 41.7%

None(2) 0 3 0.0%

SEE2 13 13 100.0%

MATH 205 (1) 11 11 100.0% 68.4% 55.6%

MATH 206 (1) 2 2 100.0% 64.5% 41.7%

SEE3 16 20 80.0%

MATH 242 0 1 0.0% 64.5% 41.7%

MATH 243 4 7 57.1% 71.3% 68.2%

MATH 244 5 5 100.0%

MATH 302 4 4 100.0%

MATH 307 3 3 100.0%

(1) Courses taught through emporium in Summer SEE Programs

(2) Three (3) students did not test into a minimum Math 135.


Table 28 shows that the students enrolled in the math emporium based courses generally had higher success rates than the same courses in the Fall 2011 semester. However, a comparison was also made between the success of individual students between their math emporium in the summer and their traditional math courses in the following Fall 2011 semester. In the Summer 2011 SEE1 and SEE2 programs, a total of 28 students took an emporium based math course. 21 (75%) students enrolled in a PEEC math course in the following Fall 2011 semester.

The following table compares the PEEC/IKE cohort success rates in the Fall 2011 term with the Summer 2011 success rates.

Table 29. IKE cohort Summer 2011 vs. Fall 2011 Success Rates

Summer 2011 Fall 2011

Successful

Completers Attempters Success

Rate Success Rate

SEE1(1) 12 15 80.0% 60.0%

SEE2(1) 13 13 100.0% 54.5%

SEE3 16 20 80.0% 61.5%

(1) Courses taught through emporium in Summer SEE Programs

(2) Total of 16 students from the summer were not enrolled in any math course in Fall 2011 The above table indicates that while the Summer 2011 success rates are generally from 80%

to 100%, which is well above the College success rate for these courses in regular semesters, the success rates for the same students in the following Fall 2011 term were generally lower ranging from 54.5% to 61.5%. A total of 16 students (5 from SEE1, 2 from SEE2, and 8 from SEE3) did not enroll in a math course in Fall 2011. As a note, 4 students from SEE3 completed their math course requirements in Summer 2011.

Student Feedback on 2011 Math Emporium SEE1

Five questions in SEE1 online survey were dedicated to having students evaluate their experiences with the math emporium. With regards to overall feelings about the math emporium, 93% of the students surveyed indicated that they were satisfied with the mathematics emporium experience. While 71% of the students said working with other students during the math emporium was a positive part of their math emporium experience, some commented that when other students would get tired of doing math, they started to talk to each other and get distracted, which moderately diverted their attention from their math emporium experience. 50% of the students surveyed indicated that the appropriate amount of time was spent on the math emporium. However, 29% of the students thought that not enough time was spent during the mathematics emporium. One noted “… it [the math emporium] was not successful because of


how fast paced the work was. I like to take time to really get familiar with the work and learn it.” Another noted that “…it was too fast to actually learn everything and process it.”

SEE2

Two questions regarding the math emporium experience were asked at the SEE2 focus group sessions. The students generally agreed that they would have benefited from having extra weeks to work on their math course work since the SEE program condenses a full semester worth of work into six (6) weeks. However, some students mentioned that enough time was given on individual days to work on their math and that they would also work on their math courses after program hours. Similar to SEE1, there also were comments on the distraction levels during the emporium time. Because there were two different math courses (Calculus I and II) taught at SEE2, Calculus I students would go off and complete their online in the same classroom after the instructor lectures. Students in Calculus II said that it was difficult for them to focus on the Calculus II lecture as the Calculus I students worked collaboratively on their assignments. A number of students also brought up concerns about exam procedures. They explained that exams could be retaken if an original grade of 60% or less was earned. However, the new exam grade would replace the old test grade. Students gave the suggestion that the grades should be averaged rather than replaced. Another concern regarding exams included students were allowed to take the final exam home to finish over the summer. Students thought that the exam should be given and taken only on one class day.

Formative Assessment of Math Emporium Summer 2011 was the first term that the math emporium model was used as part of the ʻIKE

SEE programs. A total of 28 students participated in the math emporium enrolled in Elementary Function (Math 135), Trigonometry/Analytic Geometry (Math 140), Calculus I, or Calculus II courses. An overall math emporium success rate of 89% during Summer 2011 initially indicates that students were generally doing well during the math emporium.

However, the students’ success in the Fall 2011 math course was also considered. Only 57% of the students enrolled in a PEEC math course in Fall 2011 passed with a C or higher.

While students generally understood that taking math courses in the summer greatly condenses a course into only 6 weeks, students in both SEE1 and SEE2 commented on how it was face paced and they did not have the chance to comprehensively learn the material.

Students from both SEE1 and SEE2 also mentioned that having all courses taught in one room proved to be a distraction. Since collaboration between students was encouraged, students were who done with their lecture would distract students in another math course who still needed to be lectured.



Figure 33 and Table 20 shows the current state of the `IKE students cohort as of year two.

37

37

39

106

105

133

116

64

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180

SEE1

SEE2

SEE3

Overall

Current number of students who participated

Remaining number of students who should participate

Figure 33. State of IKE student cohorts as of Year 2.

The overall goal by the end of the grant, is to have 170 students complete six week Summer

Engineering Experiences programs at KapCC, UHMC, and UHMCOE (62% achieved) in addition to the specific objective 2.1 impacts: 142 students complete SEE1 (26% achieved), 170 students complete SEE2 (22% achieved), and 155 students complete SEE3 (25% achieved).

Table 30. SEE Progress SEE1 (KapCC) SEE2 (UHMC) SEE3 (UHMCOE)

Original Cohort Students

Original Cohort

Students

Students added to the Cohort

Original Cohort

Students

Students added to the Cohort

Summer 2011 15 13 20 Summer 2012 22 1 23 6 13 Total 37 37 39 Goal 142 170 155 % of Goal 26.1% 21.7% 25.2%

As of the end of the second year 106 students (green numbers in the table below) have

participated in our summer Bridge Experiences. The overall goal of 170 for all SEEs will be met much sooner than expected. The reason is the addition of students to the original cohorted members of the various SEEs. A significant challenge has been keeping the cohort together, especially between SEE1 and SEE2 (only 6.7% of the first SEE1 cohort participated in SEE2). Either students are delayed in participating into SEE2 due to their math level, or students decide to pursue degrees other than STEM. We anticipate several SEE1 students from 2011 to catch up and join the SEE3 cohort in 2013. Two students who already reached a level of mathematics higher than the ones offered in SEE2 will join the SEE3 cohort next year; one is doing a QEM


internship this summer in Washington DC. The retention between SEE2 and SEE3 is however higher (46%). At this stage of their education, students seem to have made a final decision on their carrier choice (STEM). At this level, we are facing the challenge of competing with internship opportunities. The remaining 54% of the SEE2 cohort are still engineering students, but have decided to spend their summer engaged in other engineering-related activities instead of SEE3.

These results suggest stronger retention as well as better communication strategies need to be

implemented next year. These strategies include the same ones identified in the HMEM activity. In addition to these, we anticipate the cohort students will also have developed stronger relationships through the annual symposium to be organized for the first time in September 2012. The goal of these gatherings is to bring all the SEE students back together and have them share their research projects between cohorts. This treatment will serve several purposes: Allow beginning students to be exposed to the demonstration of simulated engineering projects conducted in SEE2 in addition to real engineering projects accomplished in SEE3. First year students often do not know what engineering really is. By having the older cohorts demonstrate their work and experiences with the younger cohort, first year students will be exposed to what is ahead of them in their curriculum. By having SEE3 cohort act as role models to SEE1 students, the latter will hopefully consolidate their self-confidence in thinking that they can achieve their goal of becoming engineers when interacting with more experience students who started at their level two years earlier.


2.2 Objective 2.2


Figure 34: Logic Diagram for Object 2.2

Increase and strengthen recruitment and engagement through community service, peer

mentoring, undergraduate research, and REIS opportunities for Native Hawaiian students. The analysis and assessment of Objective 2.2 will cover the following topics:

• Section 2.2.2: Community Service will summarize the various volunteer programs that ̒ IKE students participated in throughout the community.

• Section 2.2.3: Peer Mentoring will show the ʻIKE students around the PEEC campuses who served as peer mentors and the various courses that the students supported. Student feedback on the peer mentoring experience is also included.


• Section 2.2.4: Undergraduate Research will summarize the research projects around the PEEC campuses supported through ʻIKE. Student feedback on the undergraduate research experience will also be summarized.

• Section 2.2.5: REIS Opportunities • Section 2.2.6: Assessment of Retention Activities will summarize the overall

progress of retention activities implemented at PEEC campuses. Retention efforts have been focused on involving students in peer mentoring and

undergraduate research experiences at the various PEEC campuses.

2.2.2 Community Service

The following are community service opportunities that Native Hawaiian engineering students have taken part of. It will be noted when ʻIKE cohort students or others were involved.

Fall 2011

• Institute of Human Services (IHS) Clothing, Shoe, Toiletries Drive: IHS provides outreach to homeless people in Hawaii. KapCC peer mentors (which included ʻIKE cohort students) organized the drive in November 2011.

• Malama Hawaii @ KapCC: KapCC peer mentors (which included ̒ IKE cohort students) joined with other community and campus members to take care of a campus mala (garden) in December 2011.

• Kumuloa Foundation: Several ʻIKE students from UH Manoa participated in Fall 2011.

• Makaha Farms: Several ʻIKE students from UH Manoa participated in Fall 2011.

Spring 2012

• Native Hawaiian students (none were ʻIKE cohort students) at KAPCC participated in community service with the Pālolo Ohana Learning Center located in the heart of Pālolo Homes, and run by the Pālolo Homes Tenant's Association. Their effort has been focusing in sharing their engineering experience with the youth of the community by demonstrating fun devices such as Tesla coils, Van de Graaff generator, and Lifter. Through these demonstration and explanation of the processes.

• KAPCC students (three who are ʻIKE cohort students) participated in the Honolulu District Science Fair and conducted robotics and eletrokinetics demonstrations for middle and high school students participating in the Fair. Accompanying photos can be found in in Objective 2.3 Section 2.3B, Government Partners.

2.2.3 Peer Mentoring

These students serve as peer mentors at their respective campuses. They provide additional help for their peers in the various pre-engineering courses that they support.


Table 31 is a summary of the peer mentors across the PEEC campuses. Note that Academic

Year (AY) runs from 1st day of Summer Session 1 (May) to last day of Spring Semester (May).

Table 31. Peer Mentor Summary

AY 2010-2011 AY 2011-2012

# Students NH 12 15

Other Underrepresented 5 3 Other 6 7

# Cohort Students 1 7 Table 32 shows the number of peer mentors employed per semester, per campus, and the

corresponding Pre-Engineering courses they supported.

Table 32. Peer Mentors

Fall 2011 Campus

(# of mentors) Course Number of mentors per course

(supported through PEEC) Kapi̒ olani (13) Math 135 7

Math 140 5 Math 205 7 Math 206 3 Physics 100-151 1 Physics 170 2

Leeward (9) Various 9 Windward (1) Math 205 1

Honolulu CC (0) n/a 0 UH Maui College (0) n/a 0

UH Manoa (0) n/a 0 Spring 2012

Campus (# of mentors)

Course Number of mentors (supported through PEEC)

Kapi̒ olani (10) Math 135 3 Math 140 3 Math 205 6 Math 206 5 Physics 170 3 Physics 272 1

Leeward (6) Below Math 135 5 Math 135 0 Math 140 2 Math 205 1 Math 206 2


Chemistry 161 1 Physics 170 2

Windward n/a 0 Honolulu CC n/a 0

UH Maui College n/a 0 UH Manoa Data not available Data not available

PLUS Sessions A complementary type of mentoring has been implemented at Kapi`olani Community

College following the national model of Peer-led Team Learning (PLTL) developed at the City College of New York. The KapCC version is called Peer Led Unit Study (PLUS).

PLUS sessions are held twice per week for two hours. They are problem-solving sessions specific to your course, on key topics in your course, led by a student leader (mentor) who successfully completed your course. The faculty member provides problem-solving activities for the PLUS leader to give to participants in the session. The PLUS leader then facilitates problem solving and assists students in their understanding of the key concepts presented. The PLUS leader should not use the time to provide lengthy lectures on the topics. Rather, the role of the leader is to help and support participants to go over and complete the assigned problems (which the faculty most likely already covered in class) as a reinforcement strategy and/or a clarification treatment if participants experience difficulties along the way.

Since Fall 2010, The PLUS strategy has been implemented into 12 sections our STEM

courses, involving Chemistry (CHEM 161(1)), Mathematics (MATH 205(2)/206(2)), and Physics (PHYS 170(5)/272(1)). 88 out of 284 students (31%) have been impacted by PLUS.

Based on Figure 35 and Figure 36, the data shows a success rate of 68% for students

attending PLUS sessions vs. 49% for students who do not attend PLUS sessions. In addition, data shows that students are most likely to withdraw from impacted courses if they do not attend PLUS sessions (17% compared to 6%), which suggests that PLUS strategy may be an efficient treatment to keep students from withdrawing.


Figure 35

Figure 36

Based on Figure 37 the GPA distribution of students attending PLUS shows that this treatment not only serves strong students, but also students with lower GPA. It also shows that students with low GPA (below 2) are not attending the PLUS sessions.


Figure 37

A comparison between the grade obtained and the number of times students attend PLUS

sessions during the semester shows that the impact of PLUS sessions is directly correlated with the number of times they are attended. Students who attend PLUS sessions 7 times a semester have statistically more chances to pass courses than students who only attend 4 times a semester (p<0.01). Similarly, Students who attend PLUS sessions 8 times a semester have statistically less chances to withdraw compared to students who only attend 2 times a semester (p<0.01).

Figure 38


Figure 39

Student Feedback on Peer Mentoring (CHS #19468) A survey was distributed to the ʻIKE peer mentors across the campuses through an online

survey. A total of 11 questions were developed. 6 questions were close-ended rating student satisfaction on their peer mentoring experience. 5 questions were open-ended questions to expand the students’ close-ended questions. 70% of the students responded to the online survey.

Generally, students had a positive experience with their peer mentoring experience. 88% of the students indicated that their learning experience as a STEM major was enhanced as a result of being a peer mentor. 94% of the students said that their experience motivated them to succeed in college and in their STEM major. The same percentage said that they would become peer mentors again and would recommend it to other STEM students. The table below summarizes the answers from the student survey.

Table 33. Peer Mentor Student Survey

SA A DA SDA Increased motivation to succeed in STEM major 25% 69% 0% 6% Enhanced learning experience as a STEM major 32% 56% 6% 6%

Keep in touch with mentees 13% 56% 25% 6% Participate in mentoring again 13% 81% 6% 0% Recommend to other students 25% 69% 0% 6%

Overall satisfaction 44% 44% 6% 6% SA=Strongly Agree, A=Agree, DA=Disagree, SDA=Strongly Disagree

Students felt that through peer mentoring they were able to work on their communication

skills and were also able to reinforce their own understanding of the subjects they were assigned to. They enjoyed being able to help other students do well in their courses.

When the students were asked what they liked the least about being a peer mentor, some general themes were

• The peer mentors didn’t like dealing with students who did not study on their own.


• The peer mentors also discussed issues dealing with time. One mentioned that the time slot he was assigned to mentor was the part of his experience he liked the least. Others mentioned that peer mentoring took up time to help others during their own time when they could be studying for themselves.

• The peer mentors said that sometimes there weren’t enough students to peer mentor.

• Several peer mentors mentioned they disliked when they felt like they couldn’t help their students.

Quantitative Evaluation of Peer Mentoring The following table will assess the impact of being a peer mentor on student retention and

success. Academic Year 2011-2012 transfer and degree data was not available at the time of this report and will be included in next year’s report.

Table 34. Impact of peer mentoring on student retention and success AY 2011-2012 AY 2012-2013 AY 2013-2014 # % # % # % Transfer to UH 4-year College

NH Other Underrepresented

Other ASNS Degree


Other Other Associate’s Degree


Other Still Enrolled


Other

2.2.4 Undergraduate Research Experience (URE)

These students participate in research projects led by faculty member(s) at their respective campuses. The students have the opportunity to conduct these projects in both laboratory and field environments.


The following table is a summary of the undergraduate research participation.

Table 35. Undergraduate Research Summary

AY 2010-2011 AY 2011-2012

# Students

NH 7 6 Other

Underrepresented 7 5

Other 23 17

# Experiences

NH 7 10 Other

Underrepresented 9 9

Other 15 17 # Cohort Students 1 8 # of Experience for Cohort Students 1 16

AY = 1st day of SSI (May) – last day of Spring (May) The number of experiences reflects the fact that students may do projects during Fall and Spring semesters.

Table 36. Undergraduate Research Students

Fall 2011 Campus Project Name Student Researchers Faculty Advisor

Windward (3) University Student Launch Initiative (USLI) - Hawai̒i Space Grant Consortium

Lyra H., Darren R., Rose W.

Dr. Joseph Ciotti Dr. Jacob Hudson

Kapi̒ olani (17)

Physics of Electric Guitars Jasper I., Jarvis I.,

McClyde G., William K.

Dr. Hervé Collin

Robotics: Remote Intervention Robot

Arvin N., Makana R., Boyd R., Steven C.

Dr. Aaron Hanai

Tesla Experiment Steven E. Dr. Hervé Collin International CanSat

Competition Mitchell H., James B.,

Sam L., Albert C. Dr. Hervé Collin

Sleep Research - Pupillometry

Michelle C., Robert R., Sydney B.

Dr. Hervé Collin

Spring 2012

Windward (3) University Student Launch Initiative (USLI) - Hawai̒i Space Grant Consortium

Lyra H., Darren R., Rose W.

Dr. Joseph Ciotti Dr. Jacob Hudson

Kapi̒ olani (23) Physics of Electric Guitars

Jasper I., Jarvis I., McClyde G., William

K. Dr. Hervé Collin

Robotics Arvin N., Makana R., Dr. Aaron Hanai


Steven C., Jeff O. Robotics Heath L. Dr. Aaron Hanai

International Cansat Competition

Mitchell H., James B., Sam L., Joselito G.,

Kelly K. Dr. Hervé Collin

Sleep Research - Pupillometry

Michelle C., Roberto R.

Dr. Hervé Collin

Orbital Dynamics of Earth-Moon System

Matthew R. Dr. Hervé Collin

Microgravity James B., Hiroshi P.,

Steven E. Dr. Hervé Collin

Magnetohydrodynamic Generator

Nicholas S., Amy Y., Kaʻai B.

Mr. Dennis Perusse

Description of URE projects University Student Launch Initiative (USLI) - Hawaiʻi Space Grant Consortium (Windward Community College)

The University Student Launch Initiative (USLI) is a NASA effort to instill interest in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics to students at an undergraduate level. This hands-on project tasks students to design and build a rocket capable of attaining an altitude of one mile and safely returning to ground. The students are also required to build and fly (within the rocket) a scientific payload that will take atmospheric data and then transmit that data to a passive ground station. This research project was under the faculty advisors Joe Ciotti (WinCC Physics, Astronomy, and Mathematics Professor) and Jacob Hudson (WinCC Physics Lecturer).

Three students were funded through ʻIKE on the WCC USLI team. Those students were instrumental in:

• running computer simulations that have helped in the overall design of the rocket; in particular, determination of the wind-loading characteristics of the rocket as well as helping to determine the payload mass limitations

• the design of the scientific payload; in particular, designing the three-axis accelerometer and the real time clock for the data tagging.

• the design of the scientific payload; in particular, designing the humidity and light sensors for the data triggers.


Figure 40. Students working on the ignitor switch

Figure 41. WCC Rocket Launch on April 22, 2012 (Photo Credit: Dr. Joe Ciotti)


Figure 42. WCC USLI Students and their presentation board in Huntsville, Alabama. (Photo Credit: Dr. Joe Ciotti) On April 17, 2012 the WCC USLI team traveled to Huntsville, Alabama to launch their

rocket. Figures 2 and 3 are pictures taken from the rocket launch competition. Figure 2 shows the launch of the rocket that they designed and constructed. 42 USLI teams from around the United States participated in the competition. The WCC team earned an award for Best Team Spirit.

Physics of Electric Guitars (Kapi̒ olani Community College)

Students are building electrical guitars from scratch and developing educational modules that integrate the science of guitars with fundamental principles of Physics.

Robotics: (Kapi̒ olani Community College)

Remote Intervention Robot: In 2011, multiple workers were exposed to life-threatening levels of radiation while

attempting to contain the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster. This incident highlighted the need for remote robotic intervention in order to minimize human injury in hazardous situations. Robotic intervention allows for safe interaction with an environment when direct human contact is not feasible or possible due to hazardous conditions. In this project we are exploring applications of holonomic movement and wireless communication utilizing a robotic platform to accomplish remote intervention tasks. For this specific research project, we built a robot that is capable of holonomic motion, remote interaction, and also able to work wirelessly with the operator. Holonomic motion is accomplished by using four independently driven Mecanum wheels mounted to a modular chassis. The electronic control system operates on the CAN(controller area network) standard which allows for easy integration with computer based control software. The addition of the anthropomorphic robotic manipulator greatly expands the capabilities of the robotic platform by enabling precise interactive capabilities with its surroundings. Being capable of holonomic motion, having the capability of anthropomorphic interaction with the environment, and being able to be controlled wirelessy make this robot a


versatile platform for accomplishing remote intervention tasks. Remote robotic intervention will become the standard method for responding to life-threatening situations in the future.

Intervention Measurement Units (IMU):

The inferences made from integrated measurements of acceleration and orientation are subject to accumulating error, or drift. Various strategies can be employed to account for these sources of error: calibration for the deterministic and statistical for the nondeterministic. It is my intent to investigate and implement an algebraic method of reducing the position error accumulated by a moving robot mounted with an IMU. Methods of calibrating the mechanics of a particular robot to account for deterministic error will be specific to that robot. The algebraic method applied to data collected by the IMU will apply to any robot using the IMU, and as such, the protocol for IMU localization will be modular, giving future KCC robotics projects an advantage when building mobile, navigating robots. We aim to have testable output, generated by an Octave script performing a singular value decomposition (SVD) on the IMU’s raw data, com August.

Tesla Experiment (Kapi̒ olani Community College)

Voltage Multiplication by the Tesla Coil and Streamer Lengths The purpose of this project is to verify that there is a direct relationship between the output

voltage and the length of the streamers produced.

International CanSat Competition (Kapiʻolani Community College)

The 2012 CanSat Competition mission is to build a cansat that will be deployed from a rocket at 500 meters and descend back to earth while using a passive descent control method. The CanSat consists of the carrier and the lander. Within the lander houses a pay load of one raw hen egg that must remain intact for the duration of the mission. During descent the CanSat will collect an assortment of data types but specifically telemetric data through a GPS, barometer, and accelerometer. Recorded data will be transmitted via radio transmission to a team developed Ground Control Station (GCS). As the CanSat descends from 500 meters its velocity shall be approximately 10 m/s. At 200 meters, the CanSat must reduce its speed to about 5 m/s until reaching 100 meters above ground. At 100 meters the CanSat will separate into two pieces, the Carrier and the Lander. The Carrier is to descend at less than 5 m/s while the Lander is to descend no faster than 5 m/s. After separation, each device will collect its own data among other objectives. The CanSat must have a total weight between 400-700 grams and be able to fit into a rocket payload of 130mm x 172mm.

All the telemetry (accelerometer, GPS, barometer through the Xbee radio) worked during the entire flight, the Cansat deployed successfully from the rocket payload, descended at the correct designated speeds, and the release of the Carrier from the Lander occurred successfully at 91m above ground. Unfortunately, the egg did not survive the lander impact force, which cost the team valuable points. However, the KAPCC team was the only represented Community College at this international conference and placed 10th this year.


Figure 43. Kapiolani Community College Cansat Physical Layout (Photo Credit: Herve Collin).

Figure 44. Two hours before launch; KapCC team is getting ready, going through their con-ops (Photo Credit: Herve

Collin).


Figure 45. Countdown started! Ready to Launch! (Photo Credit: Herve Collin).

Sleep Research - Pupillometry (Kapi̒olani Community College) The goal of this project is to develop a quantitative method of evaluating daytime sleepiness

based on pupillometry. The outcomes of this new method will be compared to the outcomes of qualitative methods developed through Sleep surveys. This semester, the focus has been made on acquiring both quantitative and qualitative data as well as designing the methodology of our experiment whose goal is to estimate daytime sleepiness.

Orbital Dynamics of the Earth-Moon System(Kapi̒ olani Community College)

The project was design to use two theoretical models (Newton's laws and Lagrangian Mechanics) and derive the equation of motion of a two-body system (Moon/Earth). Theoretical predictions were compared with experimental results from the NASA APOLLO mission. Additional information can be found at www2.hawaii.edu/~mr808/.

Microgravity (Kapi ʻolani Community College)

NASA has developed a program called “Microgravity” whose aim is to simulate both a

reduced and increased gravity environment ranging from 0g to 1.8g by using a Boeing 727 aircraft maneuvering in a parabolic flight pattern. This program has given an opportunity to researchers interested in conducting experiments where phenomena may be observed in controlled gravitational fields. In this experiment, we will explore phenomena, currently not clearly defined by a valid theory, which produce a vertical thrust by sending a high voltage through an asymmetric capacitor with no moving parts, known as the lifter. Understanding the source of the lifter's thrust is important as revolutionary means of transportation could be based on this device. By conducting our experiment in variable gravitational fields, the hypothesis tested is to show that the acceleration of the lifter is affected by gravity. Following strict


guidelines and procedures from NASA, the method of obtaining information for the hypothesis shall be as follows: High voltage electrical power is applied to a lifter enclosed in a Faraday cage, equipped with a string at the center of its base, which is connected to a calibrated spring, situated longitudinally with respect to the lifter’s direction of motion. The resultant vertical motion of the lifter exerts tensile force to the anchored spring, causing the spring to elongate. An optical camera shall be used to measure the elongation of the spring. The elongation of the spring shall be monitored continuously throughout the parabolic flight, collecting data throughout a range of gravitational field from 0g to 1.8g. The aircraft accelerometer shall be interfaced with the experiment control module in order to correlate the force generated by the lifter, with respect to the gravitational field. It is expected that in different gravitational fields, the magnitude of the weight will be the only significant opposing force to the thrust. This may suggest that the effect of anti-gravity will not be needed in future theoretical development of models. If NASA accepts this proposal and this experiment is implemented successfully, more experiments should be conducted on electrodynamics where the source of the thrust may then be clearly defined. [We would like to recognize and thank the support of the National Science Foundation, as well as the Kapi‘olani Community College STEM program for allowing us to design this project and support the implementation of this experiment].

Magnetohydrodynamic Generator (Kapi̒ olani Community College)

The magnetohydrodynamic generator (MHDG) is already used in conventional power generation as a way of increasing the efficiency of generating electricity. The MHDG has no moving parts and generates electricity from the ion flow in a gas or plasma passing through a magnetic field. A complementary technology of the MHDG is the magnetohydrodynamic drive (MHDD) which has demonstrated that seawater is conductive enough to use as a viable means for propulsion and therefore could be used in place of of a plasma or gas as the source of ion flow for generating electricity. Magnetohydrodynamic Generator (MHDG) technology has the potential to be an efficient and robust method for harnessing the energy of the natural flow of seawater and converting it into a constant (baseload) source of clean and renewable energy. Since the MHDG has no moving parts and could be built so that it was resistant to the corrosive and mechanically demanding effects of seawater, it may be an ideal way to harness the kinetic energy potential of oceans. The goal of this project is to build a working prototype of a MHDG and test its efficiency at converting the ion flow of seawater into electricity. The first iteration of the device will be tested with a gravity fed seawater supply which will be connected to data module for monitoring and feedback.

Student Feedback on URE (CHS#19468) A survey was distributed to the ʻIKE undergraduate researchers across the campuses through

an online survey. A total of 11 questions were developed. 6 questions were close-ended rating student satisfaction undergraduate research. 5 questions were open-ended questions to expand the students’ close-ended questions. 85% of the students responded to the online survey.

Overall, 100% of the students indicated that they were satisfied or very satisfied with their undergraduate research experience. 100% of the students agreed or strongly agreed that their research experience was able to enhance their learning experience as a STEM major. One student mentioned that through undergraduate research, he/she was able to “gain real world


insight and application to many of the concepts learned in class” making the connections between their courses and their research. In the open-ended questions, many of the students cited that they pursued undergraduate research because they would be able to expand their learning experience and knowledge of research outside of their usual pre-engineering courses. The table below summarizes the answers from the student survey.

Table 37. URE Survey

SA A DA SDA

Enhanced learning experience as a STEM major 65% 35% 0% 0%

Positively affected decision to continue to 4-year institution 71% 23% 6% 0% Increase involved in engineering

programs/activities 71% 29% 0% 0%

Travel to conference enhanced research experience

56% 44% 0% 0%

Recommend to other students 82% 18% 0% 0%

Overall satisfaction 76% 24% 0% 0% SA=Strongly Agree, A=Agree, DA=Disagree, SDA=Strongly Disagree

Students also said that participating in undergraduate research has taught them to how to

work on a team with other students and faculty, similar to how engineers would work in industry. They also felt that they were able to gain new skill sets including research processes, time management, teamwork, and communication skills.

One of the students who participated with an undergraduate research team reflected on their experience through ʻIKE. They wrote, “In order to successfully create a working sensor, I need to understand the basic concept of wiring and how programming works. Thankfully I was able to touch base on some of these things through the ʻIKE Bridge experience in Maui. I understand the basic knowledge of how a circuit works and how to solder.” Their experiences in the SEE programs in the summer are helping the student achieve additional opportunities in engineering.

Quantitative Evaluation of Undergraduate Research The following table will assess the impact of participating in undergraduate research on

student retention and success. Academic Year 2011-2012 transfer and degree data was not available at the time of this report and will be included in next year’s report.

Table 38. Impact of URE on student retention and success AY 2011-2012 AY 2012-2013 AY 2013-2014 # % # % # % Transfer to UH 4-year College


Other ASNS Degree

NH Other


Underrepresented Other

Other Associate’s Degree


Other Still Enrolled


Other

2.2.5 REIS Opportunities

The REIS program is housed in the College of Engineering (COE) of the University of

Hawaii at Manoa (UHM), and has over 20 faculty participants from various departments and colleges of the UHM. REIS projects concentrate on multidisciplinary research in engineering, computer science, economy, policy & planning, business, architecture, bioengineering, and other areas of physical and social sciences as related to renewable energy and sustainability. More specifically, REIS projects are divided into three primary testbeds as:

1. Smart Deployable Disaster Devices (S-D3) – Lead Faculty: Dr. Mehrdad N. Ghasemi-

Nejhad (REIS Co-PI). S-D3 is a nano-grid testbed with off-grid and grid-tie (for testing and implementing smart grid) capabilities, and aims at designing and testing compact efficient deployable components and systems with real testsites (e.g., Kahuku Farm and Papakolea Community Center).

2. Smart Sustainable Campus (SSC) – Lead Faculty: Dr. Tont Kuh (REIS PI). SSC is a

micro-grid testbed with grid-tie capability for designing and testing smart grid systems and devices in a closed controllable setting with real testsite (i.e., UHM micro-grid)

3. Smart Sustainable Waikiki (SSW) – Lead Faculty: -- Dr. Denise Konnan and Dr.

Nori Tarui (REIS Co-PIS). SSW is a “macro-grid” testbed for scaling the smart grid designs to a real-life community level (i.e., Waikiki), with real-time input and simulations outputs.

The testbeds require coordinated teamwork on topics ranging from smart grids, to

optimization and control, to information technology, to renewable energy production, to storage technology, to nano and advanced materials and structures, to efficient building as well as economics, policy, and planning issues to develop sustainable communities. Our REIS program develops Scalable/Hierarchical Smart Grid Core Competencies that are applicable to nano-grids, micro-grids, and macro-grids with different grid architectures, constraints, and challenges; and leverages Hawaii’s island nature and micro-communities (e.g., Native Hawaiian communities such as Kahuku and Papakolea, UHM and college campuses, and tourism pockets such as Waikiki). In addition, our program fosters innovation through collaboration with the Entrepreneurship program in the UHM Shidler College of Business.


We envision that our REIS Program will be a catalyst for establishing UHM and Hawai‘i as a leading international center and hub for smart grid and clean energy research and education.

REIS Program has a strong collaboration with the Native Hawaiian Science and Engineering

Mentorship Program (NHSEMP) and the Society of Women Engineers (SWE); and accept high school interns through the COE & NHSEMP summer programs. We also accept undergraduate research students from the UH Community Colleges through the Pre-Engineering Education Collaborative (PEEC) or Indigenous Knowledge Engineering (̒ IKE) Program during the summer. Currently, REIS supports various Bachelor’s, Master’s, and Doctoral students from over 20 different departments and colleges of the UHM.

Since the summer activities of PEEC/IKE-REIS over the past two summers of 2011 & 2012

concentrated on the first testbed (i.e., Smart Deployable Disaster Devices, S-D3) the following gives an overview of the S-D3 testbed, followed by the Summer 2011 & Summer 2012 PEEC/IKE Summer Research activities.

Smart Deployable Disaster Devices, S-D3, (Nano-Scale Testbed) The Smart D3 is a self-sufficient and rather small Renewable Energy Production (such as

wind turbines and solar panels), Storage (such as batteries and capacitors), and Distribution/Delivery system with its charge controllers and converters/inverters with Off-Grid and Grid-Tie capabilities, which provides a nano-grid testbed for the REIS project. The S-D3 Off-Grid mode supplies power to those stranded because of natural disaster, war, terrorism attack, or remote location employing renewable energy when conventional means are not available. The S-D3 Grid-Tie mode supplies power to those want to switch from fossil fuel to renewable energy. These systems can also be used and coordination made with Emergency Management and Response units. The Smart D3 system is based on a modular optimum and flexible design that can be sized based on the needs of the end users. The S-D3 is protected by a ruggedized weather proof lightweight composites casing allowing for operation in a variety of extreme environments. The S-D3 is extremely versatile in power management with the smart switching control in the primary unit allowing any generic power to be either an input or output of the system. The Smart D3 system control-switch provides a mean to switch the system to operate in Off-Grid or Grid-Tie modes. In this project, nanotechnology applications to renewable energy production and storage devices (see above) are also being investigated.


• Community Service o ʻIKE cohort students and other Native Hawaiian engineering students participated

in a number of community service projects including: � Institute of Human Services (IHS) Clothing, Shoe, Toiletries Drive (KapCC

Peer Mentors, including ʻIKE students) � Malama Hawaii @ KapCC (KapCC Peer Mentors includes ʻIKE students) � Kumuloa Foundation (UH Mānoa ̒IKE students) � Makaha Farms (UH Mānoa ̒IKE students) � Palolo Ohana Learning Center (KapCC students – none ʻIKE).


� Honolulu District Science Fair (KapCC students, including ̒ IKE students) • Peer Mentoring

o Fall 2011 a total of 23 peer mentors were supported through ̒IKE (KapCC=13, LeeCC=9, WinCC=1) to other students in a variety of pre-engineering courses.

o Spring 2012 a total of 16 peer mentors were supported through ̒IKE (KapCC = 10, LeeCC=6) and tutored other students in a variety of pre-engineering courses.

o Student feedback about peer mentoring � Overall, students had a positive experience with peer mentoring where 88%

were satisfied to very satisfied with their experience. Peer mentoring was a chance for students to meet new people, reinforce their own knowledge on subjects, and work on their communications skills. Students did not like when mentees would not study on their own, when there were not enough students to mentor, or when they felt like they couldn’t help their students.

• Undergraduate Research o Fall 2011 a total of 20 students were performing undergraduate research through

support from ̒ IKE (WinCC = 3, KapCC = 17). There were a total of six undergraduate research projects being done.

o Spring 2012 a total of 26 students were involved in undergraduate research (WinCC = 3, KapCC = 23). There were nine projects supported through ʻIKE.

o Student feedback about undergraduate research � 100% of the students surveyed indicated that they were either satisfied or very

satisfied with their undergraduate research experience. They indicated that URE helped them learn how to work on teams, gain new skills, and apply what they learn in class into real work application.

• Figure 46 shows the current state of the peer mentoring and undergraduate research after year two.

Figure 46: Summary of URE students employed


2.3 Objective 2.3


Figure 47: Logic Model for Objective 2.3

Increase Native Hawaiian student engagement with each other and key stakeholders including Native Hawaiian scientists, educators, and community experts, UH researchers and faculty, and local industry and federal, state, and county government partners.

The analysis and assessment of Objective 2.3 will cover the following topics: • Section 2.3.2: Engineering Industries will summarize the student engagement with

various engineering companies and individual. This section will also summarize the


industry internship opportunities available to the ʻIKE students and other Native Hawaiian engineering students.

• Section 2.3.3: Government Partners will summarize the student engagement with various government partners.

• Section 2.3.4: Enrichment Seminars that Native Hawaiian and ʻIKE cohort students are listed and described in this section.

• Section 2.3.5: ̒IKE Student Symposium

2.3.2 Engineering Industries

UHCC Renewable Energy Training Summit (October 25-26, 2011)

The University of Hawaii Community College Renewable Energy Training Summit is the first in this series and provided an overview of technical trends in all aspects of the solar industry from local and and national industry experts. ʻIKE students from several community colleges attended this event.

Community Forum in Chemistry (Windward Community Co llege)

At WCC, Dr. Colmenares hosted and coordinated with the American Chemical Society-Hawai̒ i Section, the Community Forum in Chemistry in Spring 2012 entitled "Antibiotic Resistance and Wastewater Engineering". The presentation given by Mr. Timothy Lum Yee, project engineer with HDR, a civil and environmental engineering consulting firm, focused on the general use of antibiotics, their typical mechanism, discussed recent efforts achieved b ythe scientific community and shared relevant pathways related to wastewater engineering. ʻIKE students from several community colleges involved in PEEC attended this event.

Student’s Industry Internships A number of Native Hawaiian students have had the opportunity to gain relevant experience

with various organizations and companies through internships. The following is a list of the organizations and companies students have interned with:


Table 39. Industry Internships

Fall 2011 Internship Description # ̒ IKE

Cohort Students

# other NH or underrepresented

students

Student Campus

Rewarding Internships for

Sustainable Employment (RISE-UH)

Internship program for college students and graduates

planning on entering the green workforce. More information

is available at: http://www.risehi.org/

none 2 KapCC

Pacific Disaster Center

Student assisted information system support functions and

provided support for hardware, software, help desk and product

research.

None 1 (SEE Peer Mentor)

Maui

HNU-Energy A company specializing in high efficiency LED lighting

technology and solar voltaics. assisted in their long-term

maintenance and performance monitoring program.

None 1 (SEE Peer Mentor)

Maui

RISE: Through the RISE internship, two Underrepresented Engineering students were trained and mentored to research methodologies and perform a sustainability assessment of Kalani High School. The sustainability assessment consisted of three phases: (1) Project Orientation; (2) Baseline Measurements; and (3) Data Analysis, Recommendations, & Report Writing. They worked with six other interns under the coordination of Project Manager Shanah Trevenna. Aside from the sustainability audit, as an educational component, the team mentored select Kalani High School students to participate in activities and gain a basic understanding of energy conservation and efficiency. The students also assisted the team in promoting peer education and awareness of sustainability efforts. They were assigned as a point person for the educational outreach of the project, creating an engaging activities designed to educate the high school students about a sustainability related topics

Spring 2012 Internship Description # ̒ IKE

Cohort Students


students

Student Campus

Hawaiian Electric

Company (HECO)

HECO summer internship in 2012

0 1 KapCC

Akamai Workforce

Summer 2012 internship None 1* KapCC


Initiative, Hawai̒ i Island

Research Experience for Undergraduates

(Colorado School of Mines)

Summer internship that invitesd exceptional STEM

students for a 10-week summer research program addressing issues related to the science and technology

of renewable energy. (remrsec.mines.edy/reu.htm)

None 1 KapCC

TCUP Internship Program,

Washington DC

Summer Internship at QEM (Quality Education for

Minorities)

1 None KapCC

Hawaiian Electric

Company (HECO)

HECO summer internship in 2012

1 None UHMCOE

Boeing summer internship at BOEING in 2012

1 1* UHMCOE

Akamai Workforce Initiative,

Hawai̒ i Island

Summer 2012 internship 0 1* UHMCOE

Pearl Harbor summer internship at the Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard in 2012

0 2* UHMCOE

Kelsey Lopez Participated in Clarkson University Summer

Research Experiences for Undergraduate Program

1 0 UHMCOE

* students not Underrepresented

2.3.3 Government Partners

Computer Building Workshop (KapCC) The Indigenous Alliance Summit Meeting in Washington DC four day collaborative effort is

to engage the Congressional delegation of the alliance states in a hands-on experience of computer building. The focus and strategic plan is to “Showcase the Indigenous STEM Students” achievement and success. Aligning STEM programs to meet emerging science and engineering workforce needs: In our case the strategies for increasing Native Hawaiian STEM success. The KapCC TCUP concentration in the Engineering and Ecological use of traditions as a tool, creating new learning continuum that advance the Native Hawaiian and other students in the fields of science, technology, engineering and mathematic. Also, work to connect Native Hawaiian students with role models, mentors, research, faculty mentors in research and


community partners. This direction of awareness on a national level supports for measuring student and program success.

Two KapCC Native Hawaiian students (one being from the IKE cohort) were sent to this event.

Annual Science Fair (KapCC)

ʻIKE Native Hawaiian students, KAPCC, and the KAPCC STEM Program (lead by the Program Marketing Coordinator Keoki Noji, and the Undergraduate Research Coordinator Nari Okui) have increased engagement with State partners by hosting the annual State of Hawaiʻi Science Fair conducted in March 2012.

This event involved 20 schools:

• Anuenue Immersion (Elementary, Middle and High school) • Farrington High School • McKinley High School • Dole Middle School • Kalakaua Middle School • Niu Valley Middle School • Stevenson Middle School • Washington Middle School • Fern Elementary School • Hahaione Elementary School • Kalihi Elementary School • Kalihi Kai Elementary School • Kalihi Uka Elementary School • Kalihi Waena Elementary School • Kamiloiki Elementary School • Kapalama Elementary School • Koko Head Elementary School • Linapuni Elementary School • Pu̒ uhale Elementary School

and 7 collaborating community partners:

• HCC • LCC • Koko Head Lions • Alpha Delta Kappa, Alpha Chapter • Robert Keli̒ iho'omalu • Eyes of Hawai̒i • Honolulu Police Department

Other entities that have contributed ot the Fair were the department of Land and Natural Resources, Environmental Management, Department of Land and Natural Resources, Division of


Forestry and Wildlife-O̒ahu Wildlife, DOE STEM Resource Teachers, Farrigton Health Occupations, Students of America, Green Hands of Aloha, Hawai̒i Energy Connection, Hawaiʻi Heart Foundation, Institute of Astronomy, Kalani High School Robotics Team 3008, Niu Valley International Baccalaureate Program (Orchestra, Polynesian Ensemble, and Percussion Ensemble), Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard Environmental Management Sciences, UHMCO, and the Department of Oceanography (Sea Grant College Program) at the University of Hawaiʻi.

During this event, 177 projects from middle and high schools as well as 50 projects from elementary schools were presented and evaluated by judges (16 were from KAPCC). A total of 75 high school, 218 middle and 146 elementary school students were present at this event.

The total number of volunteers was 151 participants.

In order to engage and inspire elementary, middle, and high school student participating in the Fair, the KAPCC ̒IKE Native Hawaiian students also provided Engineering and Physics demonstrations during the whole duration of the event.

The following are photos documenting the Annual Science Fair.

On the KAPCC lawn (Photo Credit: Aurora Kagawa)

KAPCC Outreach Coordinator Keolani Noa performing an traditional Hawaiian chant at

the opening of the prize ceremony (Photo Credit: Aurora Kagawa)

In order to engage and inspire elementary, middle, and high school student participating in the Fair, the KAPCC ̒IKE Native Hawaiian students also provided Engineering and Physics demonstrations during the whole duration of the event.


Robotic display (Photo Credit: Aurora Kagawa)

Arvin Niro provides explanations behind the type of motion achieved with this technology

(Photo Credit: Aurora Kagawa)

Intense discussion about possible applications

for the ROV (Photo Credit: Aurora Kagawa)

Van De Graaf Effect! (Photo Credit: Aurora Kagawa)

Hum... i wonder how this feels...

(Photo Credit: Aurora Kagawa) Let me try as well... (Photo Credit: Aurora Kagawa)

Light my bulb with a Tesla Coil Lifter in action


Physics Olympics (KapCC)

A 'Physics Olympics' day is held annually on the KapCC campus in which students from local high schools compete in physics activities and competitions. This activity exposes local students with STEM potential to the college and its faculty, a small but important recruitment strategy. It also builds leadership among STEM students (in Calculus-based Physics) by providing opportunities as 'program coordinators.' The events are planned in a collaborative effort between the KapCC STEM students and members of the Physics department at the University of Hawai'i at Manoa. This year, 85 high school students participated from 7 local high schools. Three KapCC Native Hawaiian and 2 non Native Hawaiian enrolled in PHYS 170 conducted one of the events for the high school students (Joust event).

2.3.4 Enrichment Seminars

The following tables list the various enrichment seminars and professional development opportunities that students have participated in.

Table 40. Fall 2011 and Spring 2012 Enrichment Seminars

Fall 2011 Enrichment

Seminar Description # ̒ IKE

Cohort Students


students

Student Campus

2011 American Indian Science &

Engineering Society (AISES)

One Native Hawaiian female presented her research project outcomes on Off grid Power

system, 3 others submitted their work on UTV, and one on

UAV at the American Indian Science And Engineering

Society.

5 0 Mānoa

2011 SACNAS National

Conference

Attendees participated in four days of scientific research presentations, professional development, networking,

exhibits, cultures, and community. The conference

was held in San Jose, California. One student

attendee presented a poster entitled “Orbital Dynamics of

the Earth-Moon System”

None 2 KapCC

2011 EPSCOR Statewide

Conference

The conference is intended to provide an opportunity for

researchers, students, staff, and community members to learn

None 2 KapCC


more about the EPSCoR-related programs active throughout the state and

develop networks which will foster further collaboration.

The goal is to identify innovative ways to integrate our efforts and ultimately

accomplish more by working together than we could

separately. One attendee presented a poster entitled “Orbital Dynamics of the

Earth-Moon System”

Spring 2012 Enrichme

nt Seminar

Description # ʻIKE Cohor

t Stude

nts

# other NH or

underrepresented

students

Student

Campus

National Community College Aerospace Scholars

Students are working on a Preliminary Design Review (PDR) for 3 months and are required to design a whole mission to Mars. Details must

include clear objectives of the mission, the methods used to satisfy them, information about

time and means of travel, the method used to land and leave Mars, the data acquisition techniques

employed, a Ganttchart, and a budget.

None 2 KapCC

Hawai̒ i Space Grant

Consortium

Student supported through ʻIKE by their undergraduate research projects, presented their projects at the Hawaiʻi Space Grant Consortium

Symposium (http://www.spacegrant.hawaii.edu/2012spring_mtg_schedule.pdf). All ten (10) students are also considered Space Grant Undergraduate Trainees (http://www.spacegrant.hawaii.edu/fellowships.ht

ml#current).

3 5 (+2*) KapCC &

WinCC

National Conferenc

e on Undergrad

Four (4) students presented a talk at about the undergraduate research titled “Remote Robotic Intervention.” Another student presented a talk

about their undergraduate research titled

2 2 KapCC


uate Research (NCUR)

“Asymmetrical Capacitor Thrusters in Microgravity.” More details can be found at

http://www.weber.edu/ncur2012

Emerging Research National (ERN)

Conference in STEM

Two (2) students presented a talk entitled “Asymmetrical Capacitor Thrusters in

Microgravity”. More information can be found at http://www.emerging-researchers.org

None 2 KapCC

* Students not Underrepresented

2.3.5 ̒IKE Student Symposium

On Saturday, September 15, 2012 the first annual ʻIKE Student Symposium will be held at Windward Community College. It is being held in partnership with the University of Hawaii Engineering Consortium, a UH system-wide group led by the College of Engineering Dean, whose primary goal is to assist and promote the graduation of engineering students across the UH system, regardless of their starting point in the system.

The symposium has been given the title “Ma Ka Hana Ka ̒ IKE” which roughly translates to “in doing, one gains Indigenous Knowledge in Engineering (̒IKE),” highlighting the main purpose of the event. The event will feature student presentations of projects from the Summer Engineering Experiences (SEE) programs and through Undergraduate Research (URE). We want to make this symposium especially valuable for our younger students to learn about what their peers and more senior engineering students are doing.

The symposium will gather the students, faculty, and staff of ̒ IKE from all participating campuses and the UH Engineering Consortium. Community members, especially from Native Hawaiian organizations and engineering industry members are also being invited to the symposium to spread awareness and introduce the opportunities that the ʻIKE program provides. In the long term, we are hoping that relationships will be created and fostered between our students Native Hawaiian community and engineering industry to support the capacity of engineering support at all UH campuses.

ʻIKE Symposium Agenda

This is a draft outline of the events and presentation planned for the ʻIKE Symposium:


Table 41. Symposium Agenda

Registration/Student Set-Up/ Continental Breakfast

8:30 AM – 9:30 AM

Welcome (Welcoming Oli - Tentative) 9:30 AM

Grant PI – Host Campus Welcome Status of ̒IKE Collaboration (PI) 9:40 AM Guest Speaker 9:55 AM Break 10:15 AM Student Oral Presentations (SEE3) 10:30 AM – 12:00 PM Lunch / Networking 12:00 PM – 12:45 PM Poster Session & Networking (SEE1, SEE2, URE)

12:45 PM – 1:45 PM

Reconvene in Main Room / Evaluation 1:45 PM Closing Remarks 2:00 PM

ʻIKE Symposium Flyer Attached here is the flyer disseminated to invited guests


Figure 48. Ma Ka Hana Ka IKE flyer



• Engineering industries

o ʻIKE cohort student and other Native Hawaiian students interested in pre-engineering/engineerg attended the following engineering industry events.

� University of Hawai̒i Community College Renewable Energy Training Summit at Honolulu Community College

� Community Forum in Chemistry featuring a project engineer from HDR, Inc. o ʻIKE cohort students and other Native Hawaiian students interested in pre-

engineering/engineering participated in industry internships with the following: � RISE-UH � Pacific Disaster Center, Maui � HNU-Energy, Maui � Hawaiian Electric Company � Akamai Workforce Initiative, Hawaiʻi Island � Research Experience for Undergraduates, Colorado School of Mines � TCUP Internship Program, Washington, DC

• Government Partners o The Honolulu District Science Fair was held at Kapiʻolani Community College

where KapCC ̒IKE students provided engineering and physics demonstrations to the elementary, middle, and high school students.

o PEEC / ̒IKE program needs to expand the partnerships with government entities. • Enrichment Seminars

o ʻIKE cohort student and other Native Hawaiian students interested in pre-engineering/engineerg attended the following enrichment seminars.

� American Indian Science & Engineering Society Regional Conference � 2011 SACNAS National Conference � 2011 EPSCOR Statewide Conference � National Communtiy College Aerospace Scholars � National Conference on Undergraduate Research (NCUR) � Emerging Research National (ERN) Conference in STEM � Computer Building Workshop, Washington, DC

• ʻIKE Student Symposium o Inaugural ̒IKE Student Symposium to be held on Saturday, September 15, 2012 at

Windward Community College. o Primary goal is to feature student presentations of project from the Summer

Engineering Experience (SEE) programs and through Undergraduate Research Experiences (URE).

o Invitees will include ̒IKE students, faculty, staff, administration, Native Hawaiian serving organizations, engineering industry partners.


2.4 Overall Goals

As a result of the support of the PEEC grant, the following section indicates the progress of the overall grant outcomes. At the time of this report, Spring 2012 outcome data was not available, therefore the complete academic year (2011-2012) data is not presented.

2.4.1 ASNS Students Completion

50 students complete the Associate in Science in Natural Science (ASNS) degree.

The ASNS degree program provides targeted advising and precise course sequencing for the efficient transfer of STEM students. The degree provides a focus for the college to identify, recruit, counsel, and retain STEM students. The University of Hawai̒i Board of Regents approved the change from provisional to established program for the Associate in Science in Natural Science (ASNS) degree on 7/7/2011. This new degree provides a clear and explicit pathway to students intending to transfer into STEM majors at baccalaureate institutions. The ASNS degree program provides targeted advising and precise course sequencing for the efficient transfer of STEM students. The degree provides a focus for the college to identify, recruit, counsel, and retain STEM students. The ASNS degree program includes undergraduate research opportunities that draw on the College's strengths in terms of faculty knowledge and available resources. In the next year, more courses which are specifically research based will be added as elective. This degree will be the goal for students who move through the KapCC STEM Program‘s curricular pathways.

ASNS Degrees available at UH System campuses:

• Effective Fall 2007, UH Maui College offers an ASNS degree with concentrations in Life

Science and Physical Science. • Effective July, 2011, the ASNS at Kapʻiolani Community College was officially

approved by the University of Hawaiʻi Board of Regents as an established program. KapCC offers ASNS in Life Science, Physical Science, and Pre-Engineering (starting in Fall 2012).

• Effective Spring 2012, Leeward Community College offers an ASNS degree with concentrations in Biological Science, Physical Science, and a new concentration in Pre-Engineering.

• Windward, Kauai, and Hawaiʻi Community Colleges have received authorization to plan their ASNS degrees, and are expected to go before the Board of Regents in Fall 2012 for approval as provisional programs. Leeward CC and UH Maui college currently have ASNS degrees approved as provisional programs.

As of July 2012, we are proud to announce the impending signing of an articulation agreement between KapCC, LCC, and the University of Hawai̒ i at Mānoa. The agreement facilitates the transfer of students who complete the Associate of Science in Natural Science with


a concentration in engineering at Kapʻiolani Community College, and Leeward Community College at the University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa College of Engineering with a minimum GPA of 2.0 or higher. Students are eligible for the automatic admission to the UHM College of Engineering in the semester they complete the ASNS degree. The current minimum GPA of admission for students who do not obtain the ASNS is 3.0. This reflects the high level of competencies students have obtained from Kapʻiolani Community College and Leeward Community College.

Table 42. ASNS Graduation

Term Cohort/Non-Cohort # of students completing ASNS

Fall 2011 Cohort 0

Non-Cohort (all others) 5 Total 5

2.4.2 Pre-Engineering Core Curriculum Completion

155 students complete all of a shared 39-credit pre-engineering core curriculum and transfer.

The shared 39-credit pre-engineering core curriculum can be found in Table 1.

Table 43 shows the number of ʻIKE cohort students who have completed the above

curriculum.

Table 43. Students completing PEEC Core Curriculum

Term # of ̒ IKE cohort students completing pre-engineering core curriculum

Fall 2011 4* *The four students who have completed the 39-credit pre-engineering core curriculum were students in the Summer 2011 SEE3 program at UH Mānoa. They are all current students of junior standing in the College of Engineering. The above table is only for Fall 2011 and we expect the 2011 SEE3 cohort to be completed by Spring 2012. Table 44 is a summary of the overall transfer data into the UH Mānoa College of Engineering (UHMCOE). The data was provided by the UHMCOE.

Table 44. UHM College of Engineering Transfer Data

Fall 2011 Spring 2012 AY 2011-2012 (Totals) Total # of students entered COE 238 73 311 Transfers 88 71 159 (51.1%) UHCC Transfers 27 18 45 (14.4%)

UHCC Transfer

Breakdown

KapCC 14 9 23 KapCC - ASNS 1 1 2

LeeCC 9 6 15 WinCC 1 0 1


HonCC 1 2 3 KauaiCC 2 0 2

Other 61 53 114

Table 45 breaks down the transfer rates of IKE Cohort students.

Table 45. UHM College of Engineering Trasfer Data - Cohort Students

Campus Fall 2011 Spring 2012 AY 2011-2012 Totals

UHCC Transfer (Cohort students)

KapCC 2 0 2 LeeCC 0 3 3 WinCC 2 1 3 HonCC 0 0 0

UH Maui College 0 0 0

2.4.3 UHMCOE Bachelor of Science Degree Completion

124 NH students complete UHMCOE Bachelor of Science Degree

Once students transfer to UH Mānoa and into the College of Engineering they can decide to get their Bachelor of Science Degrees in:

• Civil Engineering (CEE) • Electrical Engineering (EE) • Computer Engineering (CENG) • Mechanical Engineering (ME)

Other engineering degrees offered at UH Mānoa but that are not housed in the College of Engineering include:

• Biological Engineering (BE) in the College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources (CTAHR)

Table 46 summarizes who earned a BS in one of the above engineering degrees.

Table 46. BS Graduation

Term Cohort/Non Cohort # of students completing BS degree

Fall 2011 Cohort 0

Non-Cohort (all others) 17 Total 17

2.4.4 Other Measures of Success

The following measures of success as stated specifically in the PEEC grant proposal were not covered in other areas of this report. At the time of this report, Spring 2012 data was not available.


1. Semester-to-semester re-enrollment: The following table summarizes the percentage of the Fall semester to the subsequent Spring semester reenrollment rate. Percentages are based off the original number of cohort students.

Table 47. Semester-to-Semester Reenrollment

%* Fall to Subsequent Spring Reenrollment Cohort Fall 2011 to Spring 2012

2011 (n=15) 87% 2011-2 (n=13) 100% 2011-3 (n=20) 95%

*% of original cohort Cohort 2011 = SEE1 in Summer 2011

Cohort 2011-2 = SEE2 in Summer 2011 Cohort 2011-3 = SEE3 in Summer 2011

2. Academic Progress: The following table shows the average number of credits earned in the Summer and Fall 2011 terms. The table also summarizes the average total number of credits each cohort has earned up to Fall 2011.

Table 48. Average Credits Earned per term

Avg. # of credits earned in: Avg Total Credits (up to Fall 2011)

Academic Year Goal (end of Spring 2012)

Cohort Prior to Summer 2011 Summer 2011 Fall 2011

2011 0 3.2 10.3 11.5 30 credits

2011-2* 42.1 4.7 10.5 56.1 30-60 credits

2011-3* 65.3 3.7 12.4 77.7 60-90 credits

peec/ ʻike annual report 2012 - university of · pdf filepage 1 peec / ike 2012 annual report...

Documents