). We expect thatour work will inform future efforts to moderate behaviors and team dynamics throughinterventions such as conflict management and self-advocacy.AcknowledgmentsThis work was supported by the National Science Foundation’s Research Initiation inEngineering Formation (RIEF) program under Grant No. 2106322. Any opinions, findings,conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do notnecessarily reflect the views of NSF. We also acknowledge the work of Ana Biviano, a graduateresearcher on this project. We thank anonymous reviewers to an earlier draft of this manuscript.References 5Aragon O., Pietri E. and Powell B. (2023) Gender bias in teaching
Endeavour staff was experiencing in and out of the classroom. Also, the researchers felt thatthe high frequency of the survey delivery (five times over the two-year period of the program)was leading the students to not reflect on the survey questions as deeply as was desired sincethey had seen the questions so many times before. Therefore, modifications were continuouslybeing made to the original study design with the first three cohorts (e.g., a shift to focus groupsas opposed to Liker-scale surveys). Although the initial survey data would still prove useful forachieving specific aim 3 (an engagement dashboard), engagement measures have since moved tomore qualitative methods of data collection [8]. Work is still being done by the staff to pull in
(grant number2034800). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in thismaterial are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National ScienceFoundation. The authors thank our project evaluator Dr. Elizabeth Litzler and advisory boardmember Diana Gonzalez for their support and guidance on this project. The authors also thankthe Year 2 participants for supporting this work by sharing their experiences in our survey.References[1] T. M. Evans, L. Bira, J. Beltran-Gastelum, L. T. Weiss, and N. L. Vanderford, “Evidence for a mental health crisis in graduate education,” The FASEB Journal, vol. 36, pp. 282- 284, 2018.[2] A. K. Flatt, “A Suffering Generation: Six factors
in the Journals: Publication Patterns in Political Science,” PS: Political Science & Politics, vol. 50, no. 2, pp. 433–447, Apr. 2017, doi: 10.1017/S1049096516002985.[22] P. Chakravartty, R. Kuo, V. Grubbs, and C. McIlwain, “#CommunicationSoWhite,” Journal of Communication, vol. 68, no. 2, pp. 254–266, Apr. 2018, doi: 10.1093/joc/jqy003.[23] L. Urrieta, L. Méndez, and E. Rodríguez, “‘A moving target’: a critical race analysis of Latina/o faculty experiences, perspectives, and reflections on the tenure and promotion process,” International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, vol. 28, no. 10, pp. 1149–1168, Nov. 2015, doi: 10.1080/09518398.2014.974715.[24] A. A. Berhe et al., “Scientists from
this paper are those of the authors and do not, necessarily, reflect those of the National ScienceFoundation (NSF).References[1] J. Njock Libii, “Building an Infrastructure to Enhance and Sustain the Success of STEM Majors Who are Commuting Students,” presented at 2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA, June 2018. 10.18260/1-2. Paper# 30128.[2] Indiana Commission for Higher Education College Completion Reports, 2022. [online] https://www.in.gov/che/files/2022_College_Completion_Report_10_03_2022.pdf.[3] National Center for Education Statistics, “Undergraduate Retention and Graduation Rates,” Condition of Education. U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences
EPRA evaluates theirattitudes to social responsibility. But our analysis has a current gap in that we have not yetassessed differences in student work displaying their ethical reasoning on the problems of thecourse. The use of the PM evaluations will address this gap and evaluate ethical achievement onthe specific projects the courses were designed to prepare them for.AcknowledgementsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation, specifically theDivision of Undergraduate Engineering in the Directorate for STEM Education, under Grant No.2020560. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material arethose of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National
file (102,206 records). Since there were inconsistent spellings or errorsin journal titles, spellings were cleaned up. Corresponding CiteScore was added to thepublication records as a new column. Since 36 journal titles that were not on the list wereretrieved because of a loose phrase (quotation marks around the words to allow for wildcards andlemmatization) in the search, 8,224 records of these journal titles were removed, resulting in93,982 records.Next, EIDs (Scopus assigned unique academic work identifiers) of records were uploaded toSciVal for generating research topics. SciVal defined that a publication belongs to only one“topic” [6] which is composed of three controlled terms. The author separated the "topic” intothree terms to reflect
presented, or when their idea might be perceived as contradicting another person’s idea.To help students overcome these concerns, the first skill we taught the students was to treatevery idea as having potential to contribute to a positive outcome.All team members are empowered to act this way, not just the “Team Leader” or “ProjectManager”. We discussed how to foster psychological safety by asking for input: • Ask for input from everyone. • Encourage multiple ideas from people. • Encourage out-of-the-box ideas.We also discussed how to foster psychological safety in how a person responds to teammembers’ contributions: • Affirm the value of contributions as they are made. • Reflect back the potential value of an idea.To practice this
3083Similarly, using either Pearson’s Chi-Squared test for independence or Fisher’s exact test (p-value 0.027 or 0.023 respectively) resulted in rejecting the null hypothesis that gender isindependent of student’s outcome (Pass or FW). Analysis supports that gender and the studentoutcome are not independent. Specifically, female students have a significantly higher passingrate. Predicting student success based on ethnicity, gender, and all the interactions between thosevariables using a logistic regression model is significantly better than a null model (p-value <9.83(10)-16 using a drop in deviance test). However, in this model no individual factor wassignificant in predicting student success (all p-values > 0.05).These findings reflect
Figure 2. It reflects the diversity of the collegeof ECST. 13 of 24 students responding to a question about ethnicity were LatinX. A majority of respondents(15) indicated an expected graduation date of 2023, meaning that they enrolled in the Robotics courseduring their second- or third-to last semester at college. More than half of the students (55%) werecommunity college transfer students. Figure 2. Student participants by race/ethnicity To understand the impact of the course, information on students’ previous experience with hands-onengineering projects in their major was also collected, as shown in Figure 3. Only 8 students (33%) hadtaken courses in the past that provided hands-on experience in their major
of retention. Anecdotally,one group that worked on the wind turbines suggested that the wind turbines be painted purplesince insects stay away from ultraviolet light, and therefore the birds would not be attracted toflying into the wind turbines, thus reducing bird kills. Connecting color to bird kills in a fluidmechanics course is at the “Create” level of Bloom’s Taxonomy.ConclusionThe course grades have shown significant improvement with the implementation of a semester-long group project, while the final exam grades do not reflect this. However, with three yearsrunning of the course with the project, it has been noted by the instructors that the students maynot retain each lecture topic or the material on the comprehensive final exam, but
samples of their final, revised redesigns. Students reflect on the inaccuracies in FEA and use FEA to investigate the trends in strength as they change the geometric design of the part, rather than using FEA as an accurate predictor of strength.Week 4 • Lecture: On the last day of the lab, the lecture focuses on highlighting the use of prototyping, simulations and DBT cycle in the broader engineering design or product development process. The instructor shares the broader applications of FDM, and students share their main takeaways from the lab. • Activity: Students bring 5 – 7 3D printed samples of their redesigns (Figure 4), give a short presentation on their redesign, and determine the force and location of
. Another effective solution that we came upwith was to hold the followup presentation and student Q&A session.Student Feedback and ReflectionsBased on our interaction with the students through the followup and Q&A session as well as thewritten feedback/reflection statements provided by the students, we believe that this PBL initiativehas been quite successful in its initial launching phase. Here is a sample feedback that we receivedfrom a group of four students at WPI: “Using the Nanohub software was a very educationalexperience, particularly in conjunction with Daggett’s paper and the paper by Bustamante et al.The myriad of graphs produced by the simulation were interesting to investigate and allowed forthe corroboration of several trends
their structures courses during theregular semester.Timely graduationStudents are expected to graduate in 10 semesters. It should be noted that the ChileanMinistry of Education has emphasized the importance of this indicator since it providesvaluable insight into the costs associated with professional training, and because it representsa higher cost-effectiveness ratio. For the student, the indicator reflects the hope that all theirefforts, study and dedication will enable them to become a competent professional in order toembrace to world of work following graduation [16]. Table 2. Descriptive data for each group, by timely graduation indicator. G1 G2 G3
afterundergraduate programs. This paper will provide a first-person account of one undergraduateteam’s experience during their first semester in IBL. Students will reflect on their developingself-image as student engineers, not as engineering students. Students will share their initialproject aspirations and the failures, pivots, and learning which occurred during the semester.Students’ use of tokens to manage planned work and education achievements will be discussed.Students will state their achievements from this course and contrast traditional learningstructures, such as high-stakes testing, active learning, and project-based learning, to IBLKeywords: Innovation, IBL, LMS, engineering, education, learningIntroduction: This paper’s
ability to interact effectivelywith people from different cultural backgrounds were measured using a standardized surveyinstrument. Participants reported an increase in their average research competency ratings aftercompleting the program, as indicated by the survey findings. Those improvements cut acrossdemographics such as gender, race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and school type.Acknowledgments: This work was supported by the National Science Foundation’s InternationalExperience for Students (IRES) Site grant. (Grant Numbers: OISE# 1952490-TAMU, 2208801-NCAT,and 195249-UNLV). Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations presented are those of theauthors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation
engineering program needed to fitinto that liberal arts model. That meant cultivating the core aspects of the liberal arts model,especially a whole-person approach to collegiate development, a reflective framework forstudents to grow as learners and people, and the ability and desire to be a lifelong learner.Engineering is traditionally a professional degree, thus there was initial wariness about the abilityfor the new program to integrate into the greater college. The pilot engineering science degreeprimarily drew on existing classes and was a subset of the physics department. The revised BAand new BS require more new classes and provide a professional degree. This evolution causedconcern among other faculty members who had concerns that the degrees
theauthors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.References[1] B. Wang, C. Wu, L. Kang, G. Reniers, and L. Huang, "Work safety in China’s thirteenthfive-year plan period (2016–2020): status, new challenges, and future tasks," Saf. Sci., vol. 104,no. 4, pp. 164-178, 2018[2] "Chapter 5: Indicators for Monitoring Undergraduate STEM Education," National ResearchCouncil. [Online]. Available: https://nap.nationalacademies.org/read/6369/chapter/5.[3] International Energy Agency, "Energy Efficiency 2020: Industry," 2020. [Online]. Available:https://www.iea.org/reports/energy-efficiency-2020/industry.[4] Occupational Safety and Health Administration, "Personal Protective Equipment," OSHA,[Online]. Available: https
, Available: https://eduq.info/xmlui/bitstream/handle/11515/37397/stommel-how-to-ungrade- 2018.pdf?sequence=2.[31] A. Kohn, (2012). The Case Against Grades, The Education Digest; Ann Arbor, vol. 77, no. 5, Prakken Publications, Inc., Ann Arbor, United States, Ann Arbor, pp. 8–16.[32] Dosmar, E., and Williams, J.M. (2022). Student reflections on learning as the basis for course grades. ASEE Annual Meetings, Minneapolis, MN June 2022.[33] Casem, M. L. (2006). Active learning is not enough. Journal of College Science Teaching, 35(6), 52.[34] Ko, M.E. (2021). Revolutionizing grading: implications on power, agency, and equity. ASEE Annual Meetings, 2021. Paper ID 33692.[35] Deardorff, A. S., Moore, J. A., McCormick, C., Koles, P. G
theirwork.Pedagogical approaches for teaching sustainability in civil engineeringSustainability concepts can be incorporated into civil engineering education through curriculumchanges to the course content, involving students in research on sustainability-related topics,collaborating with industry partners to allow students gain exposure and work on real-worldprojects, and pedagogical approaches such as project-based learning, problem-based learning,and case studies. Gutierrez-Bucheli et al. (2022) suggested teaching sustainability using project-based approaches that reflect the culture and context of the students to enable them to frame theirunderstanding of sustainability. Vemury et al. (2018) also found that problem and project-basedapproaches using real
legitimacy among their colleagues and influence the twistedperceptions before arriving at the STEM threshold.Women of Color Faculty As women of Color emerge inspirit through the academic doorway and nestle into facultypositions, it is important to understand the journey. Some challenges women of Color facultyundergo ominously reflect on their days as students. Previous studies outline issues ofinsufficient cultural representation in the curriculum [7], stereotyping, isolation, faltering DEI(diversity, equity, and inclusion) policies and practices, tokenism, and false impressions ofacademic achievement [7]. The splendor of academic potential expeditiously dissipates as theimpenetrable fog of inequity surrounds and persists, overshadowing their
theoretical review of quintessential self-regulatory failure.” Psychological bulletin, vol. 133, no. 1, p. 65, 2007.[28] P. Steel, T. Brothen, and C. Wambach, “Procrastination and personality, performance, and mood,” Personality and individual differences, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 95–106, 2001.[29] A. Rotenstein, H. Z. Davis, and L. Tatum, “Early birds versus just-in-timers: the effect of procrastination on academic performance of accounting students,” Journal of Accounting Education, vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 223–232, 2009.[30] C. Ott, B. McCane, and N. Meek, “Mastery learning in cs1-an invitation to procrastinate?: Reflecting on six years of mastery learning,” in Proceedings of the 26th ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in
do engineering, self-confidence in their own ability tosuccessfully pursue an engineering degree, and how many declare and persist in an engineeringmajor. Full development of assessment methods, both qualitative and quantitative, is currentlyunderway.DisclaimerThe views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect theofficial policy or position of the United States Air Force Academy, the Air Force, theDepartment of Defense, or the U.S. Government.References[1] Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology, “Diversity, Equity & Inclusion.” https://www.abet.org/about-abet/diversity-equity-and-inclusion/ (accessed Apr. 1, 2023).[2] National Science and Technology Council, “Charting a
students’ response to a survey question asking how close they came tomatching the published drag coefficient. As is apparent from the chart, only a few got close tothe published value. This was an expected result. It was also the principle intention of theassignment. This question was asked not only to measure how close the students got, but also tohave them reflect on their work and the nature of simulation as a better qualitative thanquantitative tool. Figure 8: Student responses to “Within what percentage were you able to get the CFD drag coefficient to the published value?”Student FeedbackStudents were required to answer a short survey as part of their project deliverables. Thestudents were aware the survey was not
using principal axis factoring as ourextraction method to account for a non-normal distribution of data [28], as is expected withsurvey data. We chose an oblique rotation method (promax), as this is appropriate in educationaland social science surveys in which some correlation between factors is both anticipated anduseful [29, 30]. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) [31] measure of sampling adequacy was 0.78,which met the recommendation of ≥ .70 [32] and Bartlett's test of sphericity was significant, p .40 or < -.40); this loading indicates which questions group together as a latentfactor. These factors are retained if they have a Cronbach’s alpha ≥ .70; the factors can then benamed by researchers to reflect the latent construct measured. The
to reflect on the class andprovide feedback. It is used as a participation activity. This survey starts as follows: “Your insights into your learning in this course can help me see our course from your side of the desk. Please respond to any three of the statements below (more if you’d like). I will use them as I plan for my courses next semester.” Then students are given the option to choose to answer three out of the six listed questions.Given this option, most students tend to answer in more detail when elaborating their answers. Asummary of student feedback in the end of spring 2022 on these questions are given below: Question 1: “This course most helped my learning of the content when … because …” 77.3
should take (e.g., over email, in person, online chat,etc.), what additional training may be helpful for the faculty and peer mentors to be effectivementors to this population of students, and generally what aspects of the mentoring experience ismost impactful for the students. We plan to use these results to improve the existing scholarshipprogram and to share effective strategies with the engineering community on how to motivateand support engineering transfer students.AcknowledgmentThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant #1742627. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this materialare those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the
work, which was the construction of the curriculum map, itcan be observed that the discussion between coordinators throughout the formative process and theway in which coordinators had space to analyze the programs they coordinate allowed for the mapsnot to be discrepantin terms of the areas to be assessed. Although there is no definition in theliterature about how many areas should be assessed, it can be observed in this process that mapswere created that reveal the coordinators' appropriation of thecore points of the curriculum and thespecific competences of each area.Furthermore, it also allowed the closest programs to also havemaps that reflect this proximity. It is thus observed the importance, for the implementation of a learning
presentation anddistilled into a poster presentation. These presentations allow for reflection on how the projecthas developed over the course of the semester, reiterating the importance of holisticconsideration in design decision-making. Students have the opportunity to present theirsemester’s work and improve their communication skills through an open poster session for thedepartment, and received feedback from faculty, undergraduate and graduate students external tothe course.Student Feedback and Course OutcomesThis restructured Sustainable Materials Design course has been delivered for two years, withimprovements in course content, structure, and assignments towards SDG-centered projectsbased on student feedback. Additionally, students were given
participants to confirm that ourinterpretations of the data were consistent with their lived experiences and perceptions. Our aimwas to enhance the credibility and trustworthiness of the research findings by ensuring that theyaccurately reflect the participants’ perspectives. Five of the seven participants responded to ourrequest and informed us that the experiences and perceptions we reported were accuratelycaptured and documented. Two participants did not respond to us.ParticipantsThe study participants were seven international graduate students majoring in Sciences andEngineering. All seven participants were older than 18 years of age. They were pursuinggraduate studies at public research universities in the US at the time of data collection. Six