and then appliedthese skills directly to their current research projects (thesis). Applying PM skills to researchbenefits both the student and their research team by improving time management, taskcompletion, and communication. Ultimately, we anticipate that PM skills will increase students’likelihood of completing their degrees and equip students with transferable knowledge for theirfuture work.To assess the effectiveness of the course in meeting our goals, we developed a comprehensiveevaluation plan that included pre- and post-class surveys. These pre- and post-surveys askedstudents to rate their familiarity with and use of PM skills. In this paper, we provide a detaileddescription of the course and highlight the results of the pre-and post
. 1. Connection Plan – Future GR.A.D.S. utilized a ten-week connection plan that laid out the schedule with goals and tasks for each week. This connection plan included tasks for both the mentor and mentee regarding the goals, meetings, and surveys. For some tasks, email notifications were sent to the participants to remind them of the timeline. For other tasks, the platform also sent multiple reminders if the task went uncompleted. 2. Messaging Portal – The messaging portal allowed participants to communicate in a thread viewable in their connection. This single continuous thread is convenient for tracking. 3. Meeting Tracker – Participants were encouraged to link their calendars to their profile in the
degreesacross engineering disciplines at Penn State. Students will receive 2-year scholarships andparticipate in programming designed to impact academic and social success. Project activities willinclude intentional strategies to increase interest, applications, and enrollment in engineeringmaster’s programs. In addition, retention activities such as mentoring (group and individual), andprofessional development programming will be offered for the two years of the scholars’ programsof study. Finally, the project plans to build skills in inclusive mentoring for 54 faculty membersthat will have an impact beyond the duration of this project.A primary goal for the first years of funding has been to further develop intra- and inter-institutional partnerships
. Theformative feedback included short surveys after each session and a plus/delta (+/Δ) activityduring the last session. During this activity participants were asked to list positive aspects of theprogram (+) and suggested changes (Δ). All feedback was anonymous. Additionally, theorganizers met weekly to discuss how each session went and plan future sessions whileincorporating any feedback received.In the spring of 2023, we asked an evaluator to follow up with the participants of the pilotprogram to determine how their job search had progressed since completing the program and getfeedback on the program after having participated in a faculty job search. This survey wasadministered in Qualtrics by the program evaluator. The quantitative data was
from the perspective the mentees, roughly thesame objectives apply from the perspective of the mentors, which we discuss further inAssessment.Design approach: assessmentThe assessment segment of backward integrated design is typically a major focal point for coursedesign because assessment of student learning in classrooms is often a high stakes endeavor anddifferentially impacts students, such as affecting grades and therefore financial aid andpersistence in degree programs. In professional development program assessment, however,participants’ outcomes are not “graded,” and our assessment is used primarily for internalimprovement and contributing to the body of research in the program area. Thus, we created anassessment plan that can convey
which 39.4% were awarded to URMs and 35% to women.Over a six-year period, N.C. A&T has awarded a total of 314 doctoral degrees, including 204doctoral degrees in STEM, 134 to women, and 139 to URMs. Building on past strategicsuccesses, the University’s current strategic plan—A&T Preeminence 2023: Taking theMomentum to 2023—sets several goals relevant to developing competitive graduate studenttraining programs. Of note are Goal 3, “Position the university to be a national, premier research-intensive, doctoral, science and technology-focused learning institution,” and Goal 5, “Foster amore diverse and inclusive campus community by promoting cultural awareness and collegiality,and by cultivating respect for diverse people and cultures.” To
surveys from the Graduate Student Experience in the Research University (gradSERU)online service. The fellows recognized several gaps in Purdue’s graduate mentoring experiencethat needed to be addressed: an engineering-specific individual development plan (IDP), surveysof faculty members, and educating students about taboo mentorship topics.An IDP was created for PhD or master’s students in the College of Engineering. The document isintended to guide students through four steps: a skillset self-assessment, goals for Year 1 ofgraduate school, a meeting between student and advisor, and progress updates after the first year.The IDP was published on the university website and distributed among the engineeringdepartments in August 2022 and has since
stakeholders. Students who are in theprogram are surveyed and interviewed, and students not in the program are invited to participatein surveys. Interviews and initial survey results have been published elsewhere [12].Launch InitiativesDuring the first two years of the PAtENT project, primary activities have centered onrecruitment, marketing, and investigating student and faculty perceptions about the program.The year one focus was on relationship building with campus resources and community, andestablishment of data measurements and collection plan. The management team collectedresponses from faculty about project status for potential doctoral candidates, and finalizedstudent cohort one. Additionally, the team connected with the Ventureprise and the
plan tasks and suggested activities was also assessed as well as reference materials,communications, relationship with mentor and mentees, weekly group meetings, and discussionboard.At this point, mentors were contacted by the team to learn from them how things were going andto give another opportunity for learning between groups. The most common point of discussionwas how to engage members and issues related to attendance. Some advice from facilitators tocombat these issues centered on communication and planning as well as shifting some of theplanning responsibilities to the group. This recommendation was made because when that shifttakes place and mentees are driving the group connection, they participate more fully in themeetings and
study shows that supporting thefuture professoriate’s interdisciplinary identity development begins with addressing siloededucation at the undergraduate level and involves increasing institutional capacity for advisinginterdisciplinary students, institutionalizing development plans for interdisciplinary researchers,and aligning university incentives for scholars with convergent research aims.BackgroundThe research site for this study is an interdisciplinary graduate program centered on resilience(referred to in this paper as the IR program), currently funded through a National ScienceFoundation (NSF) Research Traineeship (NRT) grant, located at a large land-grant university. IRis designed to spur collaboration and develop convergent research
. The amount of time given away from researchover the summer to study for quals is dependent on one’s advisor; students may have to advocatefor the amount of time they estimate they will need. After reviewing material individually forseveral weeks, students generally transition to studying in pairs or groups, using a compendium ofpast problems to mock-examine each other. During the two weeks immediately preceding quals,senior graduate students self-organize to offer mock exams as well.When students arrive at their exam, they are provided with the exam questions, and allowed up toten minutes of silent time to peruse them. Students may use this time to plan their responsewithout verbal communication or use of the blackboard. Although the
departments on participating & identifying students once they accept offer to graduate school April 15 Graduate School Decision Day; Graduate school coordinators in Physics and Chemistry identify students from accepted cohort April 15 – June 1 GREaT GradS offer letters are emailed May - June Planning of summer activities July 1 GREaT GradS Program starts August 15 GREaT GradS Program endsGREaT GradS Programming – GREaT GradS primary goal is to offer students a six-week immersive researchexperiences with programming in resources recognition, personal preparation, career preparation,and network building (Table 2, organized by the primary goal). The programming goal is
model [10]. A pervasive message of thisextensive report is, “.. the ideal, modern graduate STEM education will require substantial culturalchange throughout the system. As discussed throughout this report, the system must become morestudent-centric and must increase the value it places on best practices of mentorship andadvising… The mind-set that seems to most heavily value preparing students at the Ph.D. level foracademic research careers must readjust to recognize that some of the best students will not pursueacademic research but will enter careers in other sectors, such as industry or government.” Simplystated, the primary goal of PhD education must be the training of students and preparing them forthe career they plan to pursue, not
, thisis rarely the case for interpersonal relationships. There are documented benchmarks forgraduate students such as degree plans, proposals, and theses. Although important for thedocumentation of work completed towards the degree, they are very rarely qualitative orquantitative of the experience had by the student. Just as a degree plan or a proposal setsexpectations and outlines a plan of action for work, an Individual Development Plan (IDP)additionally documents the expectations and action items for the working relationshipbetween a faculty mentor and their student. The IDP was developed by the AmericanAssociation for the Advancement of Science and experts from multiple universities as a toolfor students to assess their skills and career
Graduate Women Lunches and Diversity Community activities The Professional Development Fellow would organize the College of Engineering Graduate Lunch and Learn seminars twice a month The Symposium Fellow would assist in planning the Engineering Graduate Research Symposium, which showcases the work of graduate students across the College.Fourteen graduate students applied for this new Engineering Leadership Fellows program:eleven from doctoral programs and three who were pursuing master’s degrees. Applicants camefrom seven of the eleven areas of engineering offered as graduate majors at MSU. As part of theapplication students were asked to provide basic contact information along with a briefparagraph indicating which
and guiding student teams through the capstone design and a translational course following capstone design. In her Director role, she works closely with the departmental leadership to manage the undergraduate program including: developing course offering plan, chairing the undergrad- uate curriculum committee, reviewing and approving course articulations for study abroad, serving as Chief Advisor, and representing the department at the college level meetings. She is also engaged with college recruiting and outreach; she coordinates three summer experiences for high school students visit- ing Bioengineering and co-coordinates a weeklong Bioengineering summer camp. She has worked with the Cancer Scholars Program
discussions.Even with evidence cited in the vision papers from the NAE and specific disciplines, there stillexists a lack of teaching and learning opportunities to address this gap.BackgroundIncluded in the vision of the University’s strategic plan is the aspiration to impact the worldthrough solutions-oriented approaches to major societal issues. The university recognized a needfor an interdisciplinary approach as many of the solutions lie at the interface between law,policy, and engineering. The University established the Law, Policy and Engineering (LPE)initiative in 2018 to foster collaboration between of the College of Engineering, the Law School,and the School of International Affairs. A result of this initiative was the design and approval tobegin
transcripts by two investigators. Thistheme included 23 codes, each representing a type of coping strategy used by participants (e.g.,socializing, exercise, using a routine).Measures. The initial interview protocol (Appendix A) was 16 questions long and asked aboutcampus life, self-reported highest sources of stress, follow-up questions about specific sources ofstress that we derived from the literature, symptoms of stress, coping strategies, and feedback onstrategies for improving graduate education. The interview was designed to be conducted for 30-60 minutes. Follow-up interviews (not reported here) were 5-9 questions long and checked in onstudents’ goals, accomplishments, new or changed stressors, and future plans. Each follow-upinterview
. 376-380). Students who have more in-ternal motivation are more likely to succeed in doctoral degree programs, whichtend to require individual work ethic and self-driven goals and research (Sverd-lik et al. 2018, p. 376-377). Internal motivators, such as a desire to succeed inacademia or the desire to better research skills, help graduate students succeedwithin a graduate school environment (Sverdlik et al. 2018, p. 377). Addition-ally, students who already have a strong set of writing skills are likely to be moresuccessful in graduate school than those without (Sverdlik et al. 2018, p. 377-378). Beyond having strong technical writing, students who are able to plan,write, and revise in an organized manner are less anxious and more confident
reflective exerciseon their own learning, with biosystems engineering students to identify skills and discoverprofessional ambitions [8], with multidisciplinary undergraduate student teams to address‘wicked’ problems [9], with teaching practitioners for assessment discussions [10], and withstaff in an Education School to identify university’s strategy and planning [11]. The use ofLSP opens the door to the externalization of ideas more explicitly, with a deeper meaning,facilitates internalization of new knowledge and accelerates socialization by structuring theinteractions within the group [9]. It opens the door to ‘play’, facilitates communication bylowering the barrier, putting people at ease which fosters students’ insights and self-awareness
five participants can identify up to 85%of issues, but they recommend starting with a small sample, analyzing data as it is collected, andadding more participants and data until saturation is reached. In the near future, plans for thiswork-in-progress study include the addition of another seven to ten participants. Additionally,results from other data collection methods, such as surveys [21], focus groups, and interviews,will be synthesized and reported. As with most UX research, the sample size limits the datageneralizability; therefore, the researchers plan to ultimately extend their research to otherengineering doctoral programs to determine if user responses are replicable across programs.Acknowledgment and disclaimer This material is
and exit survey filled out by thestudent users of the Hub has been collected. The Hub’s activities also have included ancillaryactivities such as the Three Minute Thesis, (3MT).® competition, fall and spring Writing Retreats, and quiet writing time where students can showup and take a small private room to work in and make a plan for themselves.We acknowledge the need for more systematic study and evaluation of outcomes, but thus far,students who have visited the Hub are appreciative and rate the value of learning and help ontheir projects very high. Likewise, evaluations of the writing and oral communications coursesare highly rated with enrollment sustained primarily through word-of-mouth recommendations.Future work includes definition and
, committeesmust comprehensively understand the test and its purpose to make fair and informed decisions. Ashift towards a more holistic approach to admissions can help to create a more equitable andaccessible graduate school application process, but engineering program leaders must considerhow such a shift will affect other aspects of the admissions process, such as the resourcesrequired. An institution cannot suddenly shift to a holistic evaluation approach and expect thesame number of faculty or staff to handle the higher workload effectively.We plan to use the results of this study to design a more comprehensive survey that can capturethe perspectives of a wider breadth of faculty at our institution and other institutions. As moreinstitutions adapt to
% Fall 2022 December 2022 6 8 75%Each fall, after closing the survey, the evaluator downloaded response data from Qualtrics surveysoftware to Microsoft Excel and analyzed them. To improve validity of the analysis, and tosupport planning and decision-making for the course and the NRT program, results werediscussed during a co-interpretive session with NRT program leaders [17]. Noticeable from theannual review sessions is that responses changed little from year to year. For this paper,quantitative data analysis involved aggregating survey responses from four cohorts and thendepicting totals in bar graphs and tables to allow for comparisons.To gain insight into how students were building skills
material, and feeling more confident in their knowledge. Female studentsresponded more positively than male students to nearly every question regarding communitybuilding except for whether group problem solving helped students feel a sense of community.All activities described in this study are easy to integrate into lectures, and given their potentialimpact on community building, learning, and comfort with active participation, they meritconsideration in all graduate courses. Consistent with other studies of a graduate level course,small sample size limits the generalizability of the findings and precludes disentangling factorswhich may impact student responses such as gender, time at this university, and internationalstudent status. We plan to
makingtheir values salient, leaders activate those aspects of their self-concepts (identities, beliefs,attitudes) to which their followers can relate. By creating the relatedness of the self-concepts,leaders and followers form a collective identity that then aids in motivating and regulating thefollowers’ behavior [24].Complexity Leadership Theory, another non-traditional approach to leadership, argues forleadership seen as a “system of dynamic, unpredictable agents that interact with each other incomplex feedback networks” [25]. Leadership that emerges from such complex systems canfocus on adaptation (producing change, knowledge dissemination, learning, and innovation),administration (producing formalized plans of action), or enabling (minimizing
I think if we are getting the results first time, then either we are way too genius, which is that’s absolutely not true, or we are doing something wrong.” So I think I kept that belief that “Okay, I will have to repeat some experiments, but I will still plan it and I’ll try to finish my work well within time.”Be HonestBe Honest refers to having a mindset of being honest while performing any research tasks.Honesty is a crucial aspect of research activities. One needs to continuously have a mental filterof being honest while doing any research task. This is clearly visible in the following statementsby Ramachandra in the context of experimentation: “…plus, I think integrity is very important, because whenever you talk
broadly.ConclusionThis work in progress is situated in the broad question of efforts to support early career scholarsas they prepare to engage in research. The point of departure for this work is an initial classoffering over ten years ago in which students were invited to choose the readings. Thecontribution of the paper is the identification of a seven dimensional framework for describingten learning experiences that have resulted from the initial starting point of “letting them choose”and the subsequent descriptions of the learning experience along these dimensions. Thisframework represents a foundation for planned additional work including a modeling effort (howchoices along the dimensions activate mechanisms that lead to intended or emergent outcomes),an