Design and Effectiveness of Modeling‐Based Mathematics in a Summer Bridge Program
Abstract
Background: Since students' success in their first‐semester college mathematics course is a key factor in their success in engineering, many summer bridge programs for underrepresented students focus on their preparation in mathematics. However, research on the design and efficacy of such programs is limited. We examine the design and effectiveness of a modeling‐based approach to mathematics for entering freshmen engineering students. Purpose: The study addresses two questions: Does a modeling‐based mathematics course in a bridge program positively affect students' performance in their first‐semester college mathematics course? To what extent does a sequence of modeling tasks support the development of students' concepts of average rates of change? Design/Method: This quasi‐experimental study compared two cohorts of bridge program students over six years to examine the effectiveness of a modeling‐based mathematics course on first‐semester mathematics course grades. Pre‐ and post–tests measured changes in students' concepts of average rates of change. Results: The modeling‐based mathematics course closed the previous letter grade gap between bridge program participants and non‐participants in the first mathematics course. We also found significant course grade gains for students who took the modeling‐based mathematics course compared with a previous cohort who took a traditional summer mathematics course. Conclusions: These results suggest that the modeling‐based mathematics course, with its focus on the development of engineering students' abilities to model changing phenomena, was effective in improving students' concepts of average rate of change and their first‐semester mathematics course grade.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
One STEM bridge program using a previously validated pre-post concept inventory on rate of change found that students achieved significantly higher scores at the end of the bridge program.
“One of these programs gave students a previously validated pre–post concept inventory on rate of change and found that students achieved significantly higher scores at the end of the bridge program (Doerr et al., 2014).”
From Building Better Bridges into STEM: A Synthesis of 25 Years of Literature on STEM Summer Bridge Programs (2017) · cites this paper as Doerr et al., 2014
Cites
Applying Covariational Reasoning While Modeling Dynamic Events: A Framework and a Study
Carlson, M., Jacobs, S., Coe, E., Larsen, S., & Hsu, E. (2002) · Journal for Research in Mathematics Education · doi:10.2307/4149958 · Cited by 599 · cited 2× · see citing works
“This coordination of understandings is foundational to later understanding of the relationship between a function, its derivative, and its antiderivative in calculus (Carlson et al., 2002; Oehrtman et al., 2008) and in understanding their applications in engineering (e.”
Background
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Ashley, M., Cooper, K. M., Cala, J. M., & Brownell, S. E. (2017) · CBE—Life Sciences Education · doi:10.1187/cbe.17-05-0085 · Cited by 122 · see citing works
Methodological Choices When Assessing Summer Bridge Programs in STEM Majors: A Scoping Review
Caballero Díaz, D., Amin, A., Musa, P., & Leung, V. (2026) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci16020220
- Authors
- Doerr, H. M., Ärlebäck, J. B., & Costello Staniec, A.
- Affiliations
- Syracuse University (US)
- Linköping University (SE)
- Syracuse University
- ORCID
- Ärlebäck, Jonas B.
- Venue
- Journal of Engineering Education
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2014-01
- Volume
- 103
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 92-114
- ISSN
- 1069-4730 (ISSN-L)
- 2168-9830
- OpenAlex
- W1482669557
- Cited by
- 37
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 1.81
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Engineering Education (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Modeling and Simulation › Mathematics Education and Programs
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Applied Mathematics › Mathematics Education and Pedagogy
- Social Sciences › Education › Mathematics Education and Teaching Techniques
- Keywords
- summer bridge programs, underrepresented students, engineering students, average rate of change, mathematics course design
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review