andreflection of the authors as well as over ten other graduate students. The students and us share thesame nationality, religion, and language. We are at different levels of our doctoral program indifferent engineering majors. The findings we share in this paper are the accumulation of all storieswe heard, reflections on the stories, and our own experiences. This cooperative inquiry processcan serve as a guide for other graduate students in discovering their personal journey during theirgraduate years. In addition, the findings can provide insights for university administrations andpolicymakers to ease this transformation process, especially for immigrant students.Keywords: Graduate school, cooperative inquiry, immigration, policy, administration
of failure, we relied on interviews and surveys from variedstakeholders (e.g., graduate students, their mentors, graduate program directors, representativesfrom grant-giving organizations, and faculty on hiring committees) to identify these barriers. Wealso shared our personal reflections on the challenges associated with this effort. We examinedthese barriers using the Ishikawa Fishbone Diagram to determine root causes of the challengesassociated with scaling an immersive professional development experience.We found that barriers to participation included time spent away from support systems, potentialdelays in graduation, lack of understanding of the value of professional development, andfunding for participating in these opportunities
students in engineering education programs have typically been trained through ABET-accredited engineering programs. Despite ABET’s communication requirement, engineeringundergraduate students have limited opportunities to learn to write in their discipline [7]. Often,explicit writing instruction is limited to two courses: one in first-year writing, and one thatfocuses on engineering writing. The other writing engineering students do is integrated implicitlyin design and laboratory coursework. In these contexts, writing practices are often renderedinvisible as students are asked to fill forms, draw sketches, and incorporate appropriate equationsinto reports rather than write essays or reflections [6]. Instructors do not emphasize writingprocesses
on one-day career exploration eventstargeting a wide variety of career paths – both within and outside academia – in general, and inthe context of a research traineeship in particular.2.3. Multidisciplinary coursesMultidisciplinary and interdisciplinary are often used interchangeably to describe an integrativepedagogy that moves away from siloed academic disciplines that occur “naturally” withinacademia. A multidisciplinary pedagogy provides students with an academic experience thatmore accurately reflects the complexity of problems that cannot be solved within the confines ofone discipline [19]. Epistemologically, a multidisciplinary approach to research and learningproduces knowledge that integrates insights and practices from both similar
research by answering the following researchquestions using the participatory action research method, photovoice: (1) How do engineering graduate students at a large public university describe their mental health experiences? (2) How does the culture of engineering influence engineering graduate students’ mental health experiences, and therefore how they participate in engineering?PhotovoicePhotovoice, also known as photo elicitation or participatory photography, is a research methodthat uses photographs to empower participants to reflect on, capture, and share their livedexperiences [23]. This method is part of a grouping of participatory action research, in whichparticipants in the study are seen as co-investigators
alternate pathway, i.e.roadmap, for STEM Ph.D. students that is scalable and reflective of the evolving employmentlandscape and workforce needs. The pedagogical implications of these innovations will beinvestigated via original pedagogical research hypotheses and application of a detailed evaluationand assessment component. Expected outcomes include the development of strategies to broadenparticipation of female and veteran students in doctoral programs at our university, and thepropagation of successful strategies to other universities.The PAtENT Program’s Innovative RoadmapThe PAtENT program will ensure students do not enroll in additional coursework, but insteadoffer an alternative pathway toward the doctoral degree. The PAtENT program thus
cultivate an engineeringworkforce that represents our entire population [1-4]. Research has shown positive educationalbenefits when students interact with those who come from different perspectives and livedexperiences, contributing to improved complex thinking, intellectual self-confidence andengagement, improved motivation to understand the perspectives of others, greater feelings ofcitizenship, and a stronger motivation to achieve [5-11]. Measurable performance benefits havealso been observed in the workplace [12-16]. These reasons and others reflect the importance ofbuilding an engineering workforce with the breadth of knowledge, perseverance, andunderstanding of societal needs required to address today’s global challenges.STEM programs in
cultureof STEM departments [21], makes it more difficult for students who do not reflect these imagesto enter the community of practice [2], [22, p. 1207]. Engineer, researcher, student, and educator roles are commonly enacted by engineeringdoctoral students during their graduate studies [23]. While these academic roles may align with adoctoral students’ interests, they may also be strictly defined by the institution that the doctoralstudent serves. For example, a doctoral student may or may not be interested in being in the roleof an educator but may have to be a TA as part of their graduate program. However, regardlessof how interested they are in that role, the expectations and structure of their behaviors whenenacting that role are
wholly inclusive ofthe online learners as legitimate members of the course community. Below we will brieflydiscuss each of these components and how they work to support the program. Notably, what isdescribed here reflects the reality of a pre- (and likely post-) COVID environment whengenerally residential students meet in person and online learners participate in the courseasynchronously. 1. Technology infrastructure. Lecture capture is a relatively common practice in higher education generally [16] and online engineering education specifically [17]. The quality of the recordings are important determinants of distance learners’ experiences [18], [19].Low quality videos marked by things like poor audio and unclear video can
outside of academia.’Questions of validity for the percentage comparisons between ethnic groups exist for severalreasons: several female subjects identified as both White and Asian/ Hispanic, one subject didnot indicate their ethnicity (N=14), and the way that, when completing the survey, somerespondents selected all reasons, while others chose just two or three.Even though study statistics are not significant and are somewhat limited in their validity,reflecting on both the gender and ethnic comparisons brings out several statistics that we plan tocontinue to monitor as subsequent cohorts participate in the NRT. The strongest finding is thatwomen, both White and Asian/ Hispanic, appear to be more strongly attracted to theinterdisciplinary nature
opportunities for current students, and toopen up the pool of possible students interested in this field. Expanding educational opportunitiesby developing online delivery of wind energy graduate courses is one strategy to address muchneeded diversity in the field. Building upon the literature of previous successful consortiumdevelopment, a new replicable model for setting up a consortium was created, called the Rapidmodel, with the name reflecting the goal to implement a new consortium within one year.Researchers conducted a study to determine the effectiveness of the model, through observingprogram meetings, interviewing faculty, staff and administrators engaged in the consortiumdevelopment work, and examining course sharing outcomes. Researchers
varyconsiderably and we found no evidence of programs sharing the same assessment instruments orprotocols. A few examples are below. They describe evaluation from different viewpoints and we presentthem here to show examples of the diversity of methods employed, and some research outcomes andreflections. • One paper described the use of specific assessment methods including competency rubrics, individual development plans, and ePortfolios for evaluation (Chang, Semma, Fowler, & Arroyave, 2021). The rubrics encompassed professional and technical skills including: 1) interdisciplinary knowledge generation, 2) collaboration, 3) conflict resolution, 4) oral communication, 5) written communication, 6) self-reflection, 7