. 6. Council of Chief State School Officers, Attn: Publications, One Massachusetts Avenue, NW, Ste, 1997.[11] K. K. Hess, B. S. Jones, D. Carlock, and J. R. Walkup, “Cognitive Rigor: Blending the Strengths of Bloom’s Taxonomy and Webb’s Depth of Knowledge to Enhance Classroom- level Processes,” p. 8.[12] N. L. Webb, “Depth-of-Knowledge Levels for Four Content Areas.” Unpublished Paper, Mar. 28, 2002, Accessed: Apr. 07, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://dpi.wi.gov/sites/default/files/imce/assessment/pdf/All%20content%20areas%20%20 DOK%20levels.pdf.[13] L. W. Anderson and D. R. Krathwohl, A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing : a revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman, 2001.[14] E
onnational rates of educational achievement and retention in STEM, especially for populationsunderrepresented in STEM. The National Science Board (NSB) reports that “About 18% ofrecent (2009–13) U.S. citizen and permanent resident S&E [Science and Engineering] doctorateholders reported earning some college credit from a community or 2-year college,” and thatincludes 32% of American Indian or Alaska Natives, 21.8% of Hispanics or Latinos, 18.1% ofBlacks or African Americans, and 21.5% of mixed race people. [16] Looking at those whoreceived science and engineering bachelor’s degrees between 2007 and 2011, the NSB reportedthat about 18% had associates degrees--which does not account for the students who transferredtheir community college credits
in the United States. By mid-March, most universities and colleges in theUnited States stopped face-to-face instructions. On March 12, 2020, The University of Texas at SanAntonio (UTSA) suspended face-to-face instructions until further notice. The spring break wasextended for one week to allow the faculty to prepare for online instruction. The instructors weregiven the choice of offering live online lectures or recording their lectures and making themavailable to students. For live online lectures, instructors were asked to record their lectures andmake them available to students to account for cases in which students lost internet connectivity orcould not attend the session(s) due to uncontrollable factors. The College of
/hcp/non-us-settings/overview/index.html [Accessed March 6, 2021].[2] WHO, “Coronovirus,” 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.who.int/health- topics/coronavirus#tab=tab_1 [Accessed March 1, 2021].[3] S., Parr, B. Wolshon, P. Murray-Tuite, and T. Lomax, "Multistate Assessment of Roadway Travel, Social Separation, and COVID-19 Cases," Journal of Transportation Engineering, Part A: Systems, 147(5), 04021012. 2021.[4] J. Glanz, B. Carey, J. Holder, D. Watkins, J. Valentino-DeVries, R. Rojas, and L. Leatherby, "Where America didn't stay home even as the virus spread," The New York Times, April 2, 2020. Online. Available: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/02/us/coronavirus-social
]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2008.10.001[11] L. Bosman and S. Fernhaber, Teaching the entrepreneurial mindset to engineers. Springer International Publishing, aug 2017.[12] A. Antonaci, F. M. Dagnino, M. Ott, F. Bellotti, R. Berta, A. De Gloria, E. Lavagnino, M. Romero, M. Usart, and I. Mayer, “A gamified collaborative course in entrepreneurship: Focus on objectives and tools,” Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 51, pp. 1276–1283, oct 2015.[13] R. S. Harichandran, N. O. Erdil, M.-I. Carnasciali, J. Nocito-Gobel, and C. Li, “Developing an Entrepreneurial Mindset in Engineering Students Using Integrated E-Learning Modules.” Advances in Engineering Education, vol. 7, no. 1, 2018.[14] S. Bowers and K. Yerion
existing models; creativity is evident in the design User friendly: 0-10 The design takes into account that users may be young or old, tech-proficient or not so tech-proficient? Can design be used by the average person? Mission: 0-10 Relates to the mission of the non-profit organization/ stakeholders? Feasibility: 0-10 Is it realistic to implement (consider design, skills, timeline)? Additional feature(s) useful to the stakeholder: 0-20 Does the
of Engineering Education (ASEE) Conference. Montreal, Canada, 2020.[8] G. Hofstede, G. J. Hofstede, and M. Minkov, Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind, Third Edition. McGraw Hill Professional, 2010.[9] P. Sharma, “Measuring personal cultural orientations: scale development and validation,” J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci., vol. 38, no. 6, pp. 787–806, Dec. 2010, doi: 10.1007/s11747-009- 0184-7.[10] K. S. Cortina, S. Arel, and J. P. Smith-Darden, “School Belonging in Different Cultures: The Effects of Individualism and Power Distance,” Front. Educ., vol. 2, 2017, doi: 10.3389/feduc.2017.00056.[11] A. Alshahrani, “Power Distance and Individualism-Collectivism in EFL Learning Environment,” AWEJ, vol. 8
Outcomes Related to Lifelong Learning. International Journal of Engineering Education, 2012. 28(3): p. 606-620.17. Borrego, M., J.E. Froyd, and T.S. Hall, Diffusion of Engineering Education Innovations: A Survey of Awareness and Adoption Rates in U.S. Engineering Departments. Journal of Engineering Education, 2010. 99(3): p. 185-207.18. Kirkpatrick, A., S. Danielson, and R.O. Warrington, Reduction to Practice. Mechanical Engineering, 2012. 134(11): p. 38-39.19. National Academies. Expanding Underrepresented Minority Participation. 2011; National Academies: Washington, D.C., 270 p. Available from: http://www.nap.edu/read/12984/chapter/1.20. Seymour, E. and N.M. Hewitt, Talking about leaving : why undergraduates
, Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, New Orleans, LA, USA, June 26-29, 2016.[6] M. Lovett, “Make Exams Worth More Than the Grade: Using Exam Wrappers to Promote Metacognition,” Using Reflection and Metacognition to Improve Student Learning: Across the Disciplines, Across the Academy, ed. M. Kaplan et al., Stylus, Sterling, VA, USA, 2013, pp. 18-52.[7] K.J. Chew, H.L. Chen, B. Rieken, A. Turpin, and S. Sheppard, Improving Students’ Learning in Statics Skills: Using Homework and Exam Wrappers to Strengthen Self-regulated Learning, Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, New Orleans, LA, USA, Jun 26-29, 2016.[8] M. Craig, D. Horton, D. Zingaro, and D. Heap
, 2011.[3] E. M. Duffy and M. M. Cooper, “Assessing TA buy-in to expectations and alignment of actual teaching practices in a transformed general chemistry laboratory course,” Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 189–208, 2020.[4] R. Tormey, C. Hardebolle, and S. Isaac, “The Teaching Toolkit: design of a one-day pedagogical workshop for engineering graduate teaching assistants,” Eur. J. Eng. Educ., vol. 45, no. 3, pp. 378–392, 2020.[5] T. Bourelle, “Preparing Graduate Students to Teach Online: Theoretical and Pedagogical Practices,” Writ. Progr. Adm., vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 90–113, 2016.[6] F. Marbouti, K. J. Rodgers, H. Jung, A. Moon, and H. A. Diefes-Dux, “Factors that help and hinder teaching assistants
pilot course and teacher workshop showed encouraging results and we hope tocontinue developing the CST kit and curricula around it.AcknowledgementThis work is supported by National Science Foundation (NSF) [DGE 1723687, 1821766, CNS1722557, 1801534; CCF 1718474] and Semiconductor Research Corporation (SRC) [2847.001,2727.001].References[1] K-12 Computer Science Framework. (2016). Retrieved from http://www.k12cs.org.[2] Holst, Alexander and Swaroop Ghosh. “Quantified Analysis of Magnetic Attack on Commercial Magnetic RAM Chip.” Hardware Demonstration in Hardware Oriented Security and Trust (HOST), 2016, Online: http://www.hostsymposium.org/host2016/hardware-demo-list_2016.php[3] A. Holst, J. Jang and S. Ghosh
field? Journal of Engineering Education, 98(1), 39–52.Journal of Engineering Education. (2006). Special Report - The Research Agenda for the New Discipline of Engineering Education. Journal of Engineering Education, 95(4). (October), 259–261.Hernandez, K. A. C., Chang, H., & Ngunjiri, F. W. (2017). Collaborative autoethnography as multivocal, relational, and democratic research: Opportunities, challenges, and aspirations. a/b: Auto/Biography Studies, 32(2), 251-254.Hesse-Biber, S. N. (2007). The practice of feminist in-depth interviewing. Feminist research practice: A primer, 111148, 111-138.Hughes, S. & Pennington, J. (2017). Autoethnography: introduction and overview. In Autoethnography (pp. 4-33
variables: type of institution,modality, age, and type of careerFirst, general results about selecting STEM disciplines in men and women between the years2008 to 2020 are shown in Figure 1. Figure 1. Distribution of preferences for first-year students in STEM disciplines concerning gender and women’s participation. Source: Own elaboration based on SIES historical enrolment from 2008 to 2020 [16].As shown in Fig. 1 the number of women who prefer STEM disciplines has gradually increasedfrom 2008 (38,515 students) to 2020 (54,982 students). However, female´s average participationfor the period under review is 19.5%, a fall in participation is seen between 2008 and 2012(Figure 2), where minimum participation of 18.92% was seen. We can see an
. Horlin, J. Hutchison, J.A. Murray, L. Robson, M.K. Seery, J. MacKay, "Ten simple rules for supporting a temporary online pivot in higher education”, PLOS Computational Biology, October 1, 2020, Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1008242.[2] D. Schaffhauser, “Educators Feeling Stressed, Anxious, Overwhelmed and Capable”, The Journal: Transforming Education, June 6, 2020, Retrieved from https://thejournal.com/articles/2020/06/02/survey-teachers-feeling-stressed-anxious- overwhelmed-and-capable.aspx.[3] C. Cahill, S. Jackson, N. Summerall, K. Harruna, “Helping Career and Technical Education Programs Meet this Moment”, JFF, September 1, 2020, Retrieved from: https://www.jff.org/what-we-do/impact
help inform initiativesgeared towards broadening the participation of underrepresented minorities in STEM and makethe culture of engineering more inclusive for all students. By shifting the frame of engineeringwork towards one more aligned with the NEP, underrepresented minority students can feel moreconnected to the field of engineering and all students can be better prepared for the broader,global work of engineering work.AcknowledgementThis material is based upon work collected and supported by the National Science Foundationunder Grant No. 1635534 and 1635204. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions orrecommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarilyreflect the views of the National Science
collaborative activities among students and teachers throughthe use of Think-Pair-Share techniques,” International Journal of Computer Science Issues(IJCSI), 2010 Sep 1;7(5):18.[2] Kaddoura M. “Think pair share: A teaching learning strategy to enhance students' criticalthinking,” Educational Research Quarterly, 2013 Jun;36(4):3-24.[3] Stover S, Noel D, McNutt M, Heilmann SG. “Revisiting use of real-time polling for learningtransfer,” Journal of Teaching and Learning with Technology, 2015 Jun 30:40-60.[4] Wilson SG. “The flipped class: A method to address the challenges of an undergraduatestatistics course,” Teaching of Psychology, 2013 Jul;40(3):193-9.[5] Love B, Hodge A, Grandgenett N, Swift AW. “Student learning and perceptions in a flippedlinear
students receive.Additional data analysis from the third quarter will be appended to this study as they becomeavailable. Cross-quarter and cumulative data analysis will be performed to gauge whether therelationship between time on task and weekly/final scores become clearer and whethercumulative data would present methods that would allow the use of time on task as an effectivemonitoring tool. At such time, historical data on recurring projects will be reviewed to see if itprovides any additional information.References[1] Kemmer, G., Keller, S. Nonlinear least-squares data fitting in Excel spreadsheets. Nat Protoc5, 267–281 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1038/nprot.2009.182Appendix A1. List of weekly assignments for Senior Project I (Fall Quarter
blended offerings. In Proceedings of the 13th annual conference on Information technology education, pages 25–30, 2012. [5] Jill E Courte. Comparing student acceptance and performance of online activities to classroom activities. In Proceedings of the 8th ACM SIGITE conference on Information technology education, pages 185–190, 2007. [6] Yong Zhao, Jing Lei, Bo Yan, Chun Lai, and Hueyshan Sophia Tan. What makes the difference? a practical analysis of research on the effectiveness of distance education. Teachers College Record, 107(8):1836, 2005. [7] Di Xu and Shanna S Jaggars. Performance gaps between online and face-to-face courses: Differences across types of students and academic subject areas. The Journal of Higher Education
Engineering Education 8(4).3. Saterbak, A., Huang-Saad, A. & P. Helmke, B. Biomedical Engineering Education and the Special COVID-19 Issue. Biomed Eng Education 1, 1 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43683-020-00029-64. Holme, T. A. (2020). Introduction to the Journal of Chemical Education Special Issue on Insights Gained While Teaching Chemistry in the Time of COVID-19.5. Atman, C. J. (2020). Hope, Stress, Sketch & Kvetch: Emphasizing Caring Through Reflection in Online Teaching in the Pandemic. Advances in Engineering Education 8(4).6. Blizak, D., Blizak, S., Bouchenak, O., & Yahiaoui, K. (2020). Students’ Perceptions Regarding the Abrupt Transition to Online Learning During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Case of Faculty of
., & Sumner, T. (2020, August). Opening the Black Box: Investigating Student Understanding of Data Displays Using Programmable Sensor Technology. In Proceedings of the 2020 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research (pp. 291-301).4. Hardy, L., Dixon, C., & Hsi, S. (2020). From data collectors to data producers: Shifting students’ relationship to data. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 29(1), 104-126.
assessment strategies and their percentage towardsthe total grade. AE 401’s primary graded contributions were homework, exams and a mini-designproject that looked at gravity bays. Given AE 401 is flipped, pre-videos, quizzes, and other activelearning gate checks were lumped into participation that were graded for completion. AE 404 hada similar approach to grading structure with exams and homework. To mitigate barriers such astechnological issues and attendance, a make-up quiz was offered to earn back partial credit on amissed quiz or poor exam score. AE 430 followed a similar method to AE 404; homework setsand exams were used to assess student learning. Opportunities were provided to make up for workmissed due to COVID circumstances. Deadlines were
institutions can affect faculty diversity. In L. L. Espinosa, J. M. Turk, M. Taylor, & H. M. Chessman (Eds.), Race and ethnicity in higher education: A status report (pp. 273-279). The American Council for Education.Hokanson, S. C., & Goldberg, B. B. (2018). Proactive postdoc mentoring. In, A. Jaeger & A. Dinin (Eds.), The postdoc landscape: The invisible scholar (pp. 91-120). Elsevier.National Science Foundation. (2018). Building the future: Investing in discovery and innovation– NSF strategic plan for fiscal years 2018-2022. https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2018/nsf18045/nsf18045.pdfPyhältö, K. (2018). Function of supervisory and researcher community support in PhD and post- PhD trajectories. In E. Bizer, L
. The incorporation of the novel isalso intended to foster appreciation for non-technical studies as well as the interpretive skills thatserve those studies, and this instructor would be quite pleased to cultivate an appreciation forliterature as an end in itself.References [1] E. Burton, J. Goldsmith, and N. Mattei, “How to teach computer ethics through science fiction,” Commun. ACM, vol. 61, no. 8, p. 54–64, Jul. 2018. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/3154485 [2] J. Schummer, B. MacLennan, and N. Taylor, “Aesthetic values in technology and engineering design,” in Philosophy of Technology and Engineering Sciences, A. Meijers, Ed. North Holland, 2009, section 4; author Bruce MacLennan. [3] S. Zilliox, J. Smith, and C
, makerspace, and moment of time; however, there are somestrategies shared that can be permanent changes to ultimately support engineering educator’sgrowth in incorporating prototyping, projects, and makerspaces in their curriculum. Thesefaculty development lessons learned represent the important themes of service, leadership, anddiversity and inclusion for engineering and makerspace faculty and staff. Ultimately, we hopethese lessons learned provides an opportunity for faculty and makerspace staff to shift theirawareness towards the contextual aspects of equity and inclusion (Secules, 2020).ReferencesSecules, S. (2020, October 12). 'Eat Your Veggies' Research: Why I pursue qualitative research for an audience of quantitative-minded engineering
, provide stakeholders with a clear sense of the ways in whichRED and REDPAR contribute to the transformation of undergraduate engineering education.This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under GrantNo.’s #1649379, 1649318, 2005244, & 2005307 Any opinions, findings, and conclusions orrecommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarilyreflect the views of the National Science Foundation.References[1] London, J. A content analysis of how STEM education researchers discuss the impact oftheir publicly-supported research. International Journal of Engineering Education, 34(3), 1120-1137, 2018.[2] Brewer, J.D. The impact of impact. Research Evaluation, 20(3), 255–256. 2011
college. Based on the comments from the fourteen students, they believed that NSTI had animpact on the career choice. Therefore, NSTI offered at Rowan University continues to have a long-termimpact on the students.ACKNOWLEDGEMENTThe authors would like to acknowledge the USDOT, the Federal Highway Administration, and the NewJersey Department of Transportation/Division of Civil Rights for funding this study through the NationalSummer Transportation Institute.References1. Ali, A. Mehta, Y., Patel, S., Evaluation of the 2017 National Summer Transportation Institute Hosted atRowan University, Proceedings of the 2018 ASEE Annual Conference Proceedings, Salt Lake City, UT.
-0.03863 1.0000 0.0171 0.02995 1.0000 0.0151 4 8 -0.05851 1.0000 0.0402 0.02649 1.0000 0.0208 – 4 of 9 – Table 3: Self-rating and Peer-rating Across Dimension (Convergence) ANOVA AnalysisInterventi Difference P-value Effect Size Difference P-value Effect Size on Mean (Self- (Cohen's d) Dispersion (Cohen' s d) Peer) (Self-Peer) 1 -0.5043 <0.0001 0.4761 -0.4978 <0.0001 1.1806 2 -0.5110 <0.0001 0.4759 -0.4921 <0.0001
this materialare those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National ScienceFoundation.Reference[1] Chandramouli, M., & Jin, G., & Heffron, J. D., & Fidan, I., & Cossette, M., & Welsch, C. A., &Merrell, W. (2018, June), Virtual Reality Education Modules for Digital ManufacturingInstruction, Paper presented at 2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition , Salt Lake City, Utah.10.18260/1-2—31225[2] El-Mounayri, H. (2005, June), Virtual Manufacturing Laboratory for Training andEducation, Paper presented at 2005 Annual Conference, Portland, Oregon. 10.18260/1-2--15154[3] Yingxue Yao, Jianguang Li, Changqing Liu, A Virtual Machining Based Training System ForNumerically Controlled Machining