. Contemplation: People recognize the need for change and consider the reasons why, but they are not making changes. 3. Preparation: People take small steps to move toward change, which could include but are not limited to activities like (a) attending a learning session about change opportunities or (b) developing skills that could help with change. 4. Action: People actively engage in change. 5. Maintenance: People put in effort to maintain the changes that they have made. 6. Relapse: Inevitably, some people revert to their old ways and must relearn or re-engage with change efforts.With the expectation that the project starts with department members atdifferent stages of readiness for change, we plan to
critical. Aiming at the issue of cultivating the scientific researchliteracy of college students, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology proposed the“Undergraduate Research Opportunities Program” in 1969 first. To address the uncreative ofundergraduates, the “Berkeley University Model” divides the undergraduate scientificresearch training program into two parts, including “The Undergraduate Research ApprenticeProgram” established by the university and proposing a project plan by the studentsthemselves. There are two main modes of knowledge application in engineering education;one is a mode based on academic research training; the other is a problem-solving-oriented,interdisciplinary research mode [1]. Project-Based Learning (PBL) is a mode of
efficacy of each session. Thesurveys serve as a method to collect feedback on topics that participants would like to seeaddressed in future sessions, and we use the response to make improvements to future sessions.In addition to the session feedback surveys, we have implemented an engagement survey, asocial network survey, and semi-structured interviews that will be reported on in future work.Although not in our initial plans, we used participant feedback to develop asynchronous contentdelivery via a series of short, downloadable information sheets on a variety of topics related tonavigating proposal and grant management processes and the ASEE conference. Called Practicesin Engineering Education Research (PEER) Guides, these short documents
or “biography” of a project and the thought processes thatinform that project. Besides narrative and explanatory text, entries may include (but neednot be limited to) drawings, schematics, photographs, notebook and journal entries,transcripts or summaries of conversations and interviews, and audio/video recordings.Such entries are likely to be necessary in order to convey accurately and completely thecomplex thought processes behind the planning, implementation, and self-evaluation of theproject. The rubric is comprised of four main components, each in turn comprised of threeelements. Each element has its own holistic rubric.The process by which the EDPPSR was created gives evidence of the relevance andrepresentativeness of the rubric and
have been reported specific effects of online education on engineering students. In [2] the authorsreport that a significant fraction of students were planning to modify their short-term future plans aboutscheduling courses in subsequent semesters. A non-insignificant fraction of students also reportedconcerns about online instruction and its effectiveness. STEM students were forced to spend more timeon self-learning, and more time in general on their coursework [3].Blended (or hybrid) learning results in better learning outcomes for STEM courses (compared to non-STEM courses). Paradoxically, students taking those hybrid STEM courses report lower satisfactionand/or did not perceive the courses as highly [4]. This is a great motivation to
, Student Outcomes, and Continuous Improvement plan; and make curriculum or courselevel revisions as well as revisions in the assessment plan.IntroductionABET requires the involved engineering programs to assess Student Outcomes (SO) based on aplan developed by the program [1]. Those assessment data are to be used as part of the continuousimprovement plan of the program. In addition, ABET requires relating the SOs to the ProgramEducational Objectives (PEOs). In this hierarchical structure, courses feed into the SOs, and SOsfeed into the PEOs. ABET requires SOs to be assessed and improvement actions to be taken at thecourse and program level if the target is not met. In the statement of Criterion 1 [1]: “Studentperformance must be evaluated. Student
goal of MEAM’s DEI Task Force isto realize sustained action on diversity, equity, and inclusion across all aspects of MEAM,including undergraduate and graduate education, research trainees, faculty, and staff. The taskforce engages with the MEAM Department to help move the department from being reactive toproactive on DEI challenges and issues, and to make MEAM a leader among all MEDepartments in overcoming DEI challenges.The specific objectives of the task force are: 1. To identify and address key issues related to DEI in MEAM now and throughout the year 2. To develop a longer-term action plan for DEI in MEAM by studying and learning about the issues; developing solutions including by learning from other departments and
andsought out additional leadership roles, community service, or professional development whileenrolled in a graduate program. Recent LDP graduates expressed a direct connection betweentheir "post-LDP" success and the training they received in the LDP. The following excerpts frominterviews of the LDP graduates pursuing advanced STEM degrees focus on two major themes.LDP Experience and Training Inspired and Prepared Students – Question #1 Responses“Prior to joining the LDP, there was no indication that graduate level STEM research would be apart of my life plan. The LDP helped me realize this potential. I learned how to lead myself and ateam.” Student A (male, non- minority, PSL Scholar)“The LDP was an incredibly life-changing experience that gave
this objective byintegrating sociocultural and academic intervention strategies targeted toward URM studentsthrough gateway course redesign, expanded student co-curricular experiences, and student andfamily engagement strategies.Figure 2. Repeatable grade rates for URM and non-URM students in lower division Math 150-A(left) and Math 150-B (right) courses (CSUF, 2021c)Here we document the twin strategies comprising academic and sociocultural interventions toaddress URM students’ retention, graduation, and overall meaningful learning experience.Despite the challenges posed by the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, the project team reimaginedand redesigned the planned activities and continues to provide enhanced learning experiencesand equitable
was focused on one-on-one shadowing experiences for first-year students wherestudents would experience the place of work (a small office or large facility), observe taskscompleted by their mentor as well as participate where appropriate, and discuss and interact withtheir mentor over topics such as challenges they have met in their STEM education and how theirco-op helps them reach their ultimate goal (employment, graduate school, etc.). The programwas planned and implemented with on-site job shadowing for two years (2018-2019, 2019-2020), where students were given the opportunity to job shadow their mentor in several four-hour in-person sessions. The program shifted to a virtual experience during the 2020-2021academic year due to the
, describes the educational and mentoringopportunities, and discusses the programs impact on students in this first year. The paper willalso discuss the potential for retention and quality of education for the ASSSET scholars.Goals of the ASSSET ProgramWith an NSF S-STEM grant awarded in 2021, UL Lafayette’s ASSSET scholarship programstarted in Fall 2021. Plans and activities are set to meet three (3) main goals: 1. Improve the UL Lafayette’s College of Engineering retention and graduation rate by supporting low-income academically talented students pursuing a bachelor’s degree in one of the six engineering majors with a focus on Energy Technologies. 2. Implement evidence-based practices to enhance students’ engagement in undergraduate
Leaders later to obtain further guidance. Notethat, ultimately, Cybersecurity was not addressed as a job cluster. This decision will be explainedin the section below entitled “Transitioning from Full Skill Standards to Skill Sets.”Skill Analysis and VerificationOnce the job clusters of focus were agreed upon, the project team, with guidance from theproject evaluator Dr. Deborah Hecht, City University of New York, began systematicallyworking through the clusters. For the cluster meetings, 20 to 40 subject matter experts (SMEs) –identified and recruited like the Thought Leaders – were invited to attend one of severalmeetings per job cluster. The original plan specified holding the SME meetings in person withone meeting on the East Coast, one in the
ofagency that intersect with structural and disciplinary power. Evan, as a full professor and a man,occupies a more powerful position than Diana in terms of rank and gender, but by mitigating andoffloading his agency, he did not display change agency.We contrast this with interactional data to highlight what change agency, as it plays out, mightlook like (Figure 1). This vignette, from near the beginning of a RED team’s change effort,involves members of a change team who, at that point, did not share a common understanding ofthe strategies. Lin, in the role of engineering education researcher, had developed the curricularapproach with Arun. Specifically, the change team planned to thread design challenges throughcore engineering courses, with
simulations that could be used to enhanceengineering lessons; those that facilitated virtual design and those that facilitated scienceconceptual or process knowledge (Gonczi, Smetana, & Bell, in press). During these virtualsessions, we modeled and debriefed lessons that incorporated simulations using open-sourcesoftware available through PBS kids and PhET Interactive Solutions to support each purpose(i.e., simulations to facilitate virtual design and simulations to develop conceptual or processknowledge prior to hands-on design tasks). Teachers were also provided with a list of open-source resources to draw from.After the two virtual sessions, each participant was paired with a coach to support them indeveloping a lesson plan that incorporated a
Education, 2022 Powered by www.slayte.com Work-in-Progress: A Scoping Review for Gamification in Construction EngineeringAbstractThis paper is a work-in-progress that reports the latest findings of a scoping review for gamifiedsolutions in construction engineering education. Despite considerable attention to creating game-based solutions for engineering education during the last two decades, the existing state-of-the-art advancements in this field for construction engineering is far from achieving its full potentialand still little is known about systematic ways to direct research and development efforts in thisdomain. The first step towards developing systematic plans to
thisproblem empirically through active exploration in the game’s digital environment. Whileplaying, after learning about the tasks, equipment, and constraints of the game through a demo,the students will plan a preliminary strategy and guess a start time for each piece of equipment,observe the outcomes of their decisions, receive feedback from the game, adjust their strategy,and keep trying until they achieve the goal. They are also required to explain their observationsand strategies through the game’s debriefing mechanism. Particularly, when a user achieves thegoal, the debriefing mechanism will ask the user to come up with a systematic approach to solvethis type of problem. After recording the response, the game will show a velocity diagramcreated
, with most waiting for others to askquestions they didn't know they needed answering. Sessions transitioned to advertised topics,creating breakout rooms for more lengthy questions and sharing planned information in a lessformal setting. These were also not well attended, with 2 or 3 faculty and 5 or 6 staff fromeSAIL. One issue was the quick turnaround time of the workshops after advertising them.Feedback from these first Q&A sessions showed the need for more developed webinars with astructured agenda. Staff was divided up to improve services and workshop offerings, andwebinars were planned at different times during the day and week. Feedback from the Q&Asessions and web analytics were used at this time to come up with a curriculum that
offeringseveral final observations about the opportunities and obstacles to successful Cohort Challenges,as well as our future plans to support others who want to design and deliver this mode ofgraduate education.I. Introduction The interest in “wicked problems” in science and engineering reflects a growingrecognition that the most pressing technological needs of the 21st century do not fall neatly intoany single discipline. Because they sit at the intersection of many competing disciplines andinterests, wicked problems defy easy definition or solution [1]. Rather, they demand challenge-centered research that requires the collaboration of the full range of traditional scientific fields,as well as an understanding that those challenges arise in
active learning exercise usingactual motion analysis software to conduct a hypothesis-driven experiment to characterize howjump height is affected by knee flexion angle (Figure 1, right). For this last step, students usetheir teammates as subjects, apply optical body and field calibration markers, collect video dataof standing jump(s) with a webcam or cell phone, and utilize a free, open-source planar motionanalysis platform (Kinovea v0.9.5) to determine knee flexion angle and jump height.Figure 1: (left) Slide from provided instructor lesson plan illustrating for students the clinicaland sports-related applications of human motion analysis; (middle) Example solution for studentactivity applying basic math (e.g., geometry and scale) to planar
, Nov. 2020.[4] D. Brookshire and N. Kaza, “Planning for seven generations: Energy planning of American Indian tribes,” Energy Policy, vol. 62, pp. 1506–1514, Nov. 2013.[5] L. A. Gelles, J. A. Mejia, S. M. Lord, G. D. Hoople, and D. A. Chen, “Is It All about Efficiency? Exploring Students’ Conceptualizations of Sustainability in an Introductory Energy Course,” Sustain. Sci. Pract. Policy, vol. 13, no. 13, p. 7188, Jun. 2021.[6] R. W. Kimmerer, Braiding Sweetgrass: Indigenous Wisdom, Scientific Knowledge and the Teachings of Plants. Milkweed Editions, 2013.[7] G. D. Hoople and A. Choi-Fitzpatrick, “Drones for Good: How to Bring Sociotechnical Thinking into the Classroom,” Synthesis Lectures on, 2020, [Online]. Available
collaboration.Two junior (tenure-track) faculty members, after experiencing nearly a year of uncertainty andangst based on changing university requirements for class modalities [Johnson et al., 2020], animpending student enrollment cliff [ACE, 2020], and the potential of serious illness or death tothemselves or loved ones, came together in Spring 2021 to plan and deliver a highlysynchronized and remote introductory engineering mechanics course. At the forefront of theirplanning was that their instructional approaches would be resilient against any number ofuncertainties and unknowns, including institutional guidance that one would serve as a backupinstructor should serious illness or death befall the other. What emerged from this collaborativeteaching
collaborates with NEWT’s Innovation Ecosystem Director, and the Student Leadership Council in the planning of educational and professional development opportunities for NEWT graduate students and postdocs. At Rice, Jorge is an Adjunct Professor in the Civil & Environmental Engineering and Bioengineering Departments, where he developed and teaches CEVE/GLHT 314: Sustainable Water Purification for the Developing World, a project-based course on sustainable strategies for safe water supply in low-income and developing regions of the world. He advises undergraduate students in other project-based courses at Rice, and he works with the Center for Civic Leadership in the development of activities to promote student community
IndustrialEngineering senior design course. Survey data collected before and after two semesters of an IndustrialEngineering senior design capstone course serve as the basis of the summary data. In this paper, we focuson student preferences of project topics before the start of the course as a key factor and the correspondingperception of the course at its conclusion as measures of the course outcome. While left for our ongoingresearch and data collection, the following are examples of factors that we plan to evaluate for potentialsignificance to course outcomes: measures of team dynamics collected during peer evaluations throughoutthe semester; student personality traits determined by a DiSC® assessment completed by each student;student preferences for
specialaccommodations for an instructor. Prior to pandemic protocols, engineering faculty on occasionrecorded voice-over-Powerpoint lectures and some labs as supplemental content for otherwiseface-to-face courses. Engineering faculty at The Citadel are well-trained in in-personpedagogical best practices thanks in part to mini-ExCEEd workshops [2], as well as onlineinstruction, which is offered as professional development through The Citadel’s Center forExcellence in Instruction, Teaching, Learning, and Distance Education (CEITL&DE). Similarcenters operate within higher education Institutions across America, and even with regularfaculty trainings, it is well known and acknowledged that an instructor faces a daunting timemanagement task when planning for
• Write/use code to solve specific problems • Write/use advanced coding functions to optimize problem solving • Use math to solve everyday problems • Apply advanced math (calculus or linear algebra) to solve problems • Explain the role and value of math to othersBased on the results, we consider Factor 1 to be AMDS Tools/Procedures and Factor 2 to beProblem Solving. Based on the classical item analysis, we plan to rerun the analysis by removingthose items that are potentially problematic. 6 Figure 2: Scree plot for AMDS Self-Efficacy ScaleAMDS Mindset Scale (General): The data indicated three potential factors for this scale witheigenvalues
researchers in STEM. For example, we found strategies thatworked best for us but also recognized this list might not be universal. In open conversationswith neurodivergent individuals, we have learned these approaches create additional supportneeded to support the success of neurodivergent and neurotypical individuals: - Individual meetings where students can lead the conversation - Informal interaction through slack or text to reduce anxiety and promote communication - Recognizing and allowing every student to progress at their own pace - An open dialog, or safe space, to discuss criticisms on mentoring in both directions (student-to-faculty and faculty-to-student) - Semester strategic plan created with the student, but
early college credits are earned or transferred to these universities,they often fall outside the student’s plan of study, or count as elective credits, doing little to reducetheir workload while in college [1]. This paper, however, highlights a novel case of a dual creditmodel, referred to as the facilitator model, for first-year design courses. The case presentedoutlines procedures for developing and implementing such a model within engineering andtechnology programs. While this may not be the same process at each university, hopefully thisprovides some guidance to help navigate such a task. The facilitator model is a relatively newmodel for dual credit that was recently piloted with a cohort of high school juniors and seniors [2].For this
of NSF CISE "EAGER: An Accessible Coding Curriculum for Engaging Underserved Students with Special Needs in Afterschool Programs"; co-PI of NSF INCLUDES: South East Alliance for Persons with Disabilities in STEM, Co-PI of NSF CE 21 Collaborative Research: Planning Grant: Computer Science for All (CS4ALL)). Dr. Marghitu was also PI of grants from Center for Woman in Information Technology, Daniel F. Breeden Endowment for Faculty Enhancement, AccessComputing Alliance, Computer Science Collaboration Project, Microsoft Fuse Research, Altova Co., and Pearson Education Publishing Co. Dr. Marghitu has mentored over one thousand high school, computing undergraduate, graduate students including representatives of
activities, experiences with students working oninterdisciplinary community engagement projects, guidelines on how to better and moreeffectively interact with stakeholders, lessons on assessment of student progress (along withwarning signs of imminent trouble), and planned actions to improve student success outcomes.Tags: S-STEM, retention, scholarships, diversity, student success, broadening participation inengineeringSection I: Overview of the SEECS ProgramGannon University is a private, four-year Catholic university, dedicated to providing a liberalarts education integrated with professional skills and faith-based learning. Gannon offers 6associate's, 67 bachelor’s, 29 master's, and 6 doctoral degrees, with approximately 4,700 students(3,200
intelligent engineering tasks such asdecision making, problem-solving, and machine learning. New educational modules developedfor the Fall 2021 semester include (1) genetic algorithms for design optimization; (2)classification via machine learning; (3) convolutional neural network and its application forimage processing; (4) signal analyses and fault diagnosis; and (5) reinforcement learning formotion planning. Each module consists of concept explanation, algorithm delivery, real-worldapplication, and python sample codes. The modules can be used as the reference for students incourse projects (not limited to ME:4150) and capstone projects.A project on image-based ship classification was added to the course. Students were required todownload pictures