in the zone of proximal development (ZPD) due to socialinteraction. The zone of proximal development (ZPD) has been defined as "the distance betweenthe actual developmental level as determined by independent problem solving and the level ofpotential development as determined through problem-solving under adult guidance or incollaboration with more capable peers" [31, p. 86].Play and unstructured, informal activities stimulate children’s social interaction and influencetheir learning and knowledge construction [31]. These learning environments also promote socialconstructivist views of teaching and learning [33], where learning occurs collaboratively in smallgroups. In such informal settings, assistance from a more knowledgeable other, the
learnerscontinued to develop through academic reading, practical design, and dissertation writing toperform the highest levels of idea synthesis and experimental innovation [30].Engineering GiantsThe truly great engineers had a curiosity about the world around them and a deep desire to shapethat world. Two skills frequently marked the truly great engineers: visual-spatial mastery of themathematics and physics that describe the world, and a commitment to observation of theparticulars in their practice. William F. Baker (1953-) epitomizes the visual-spatial mastery ofphysics and mathematics. While designing his many projects including the Burj Khalifa, heworked in two-dimensional projections to trace load paths and identify the reactions required forstatic
graduate students in theCollege of Engineering to gauge need for community and student interest in creating a GraduateWomen in Engineering (GradWIE) group. Results from the survey indicated that students lackedcommunity and had an overwhelming desire to be involved in a graduate women in engineeringgroup. As such, we felt compelled to form an official student organization for the engineeringcommunity, GradWIE. GradWIE welcomes people of all gender identities to support thepersonal and professional well-being of graduate students through peer support, the creation ofsafe spaces, social events, and diverse resources. In its first year, the organization has sponsoredseveral community-building events, reaching over 150 students across all departments
Paper ID #36879Strategies to Optimize Student Success in Pair Programming TeamsDr. Ayesha Johnson, University of South Florida, College of Nursing I am an assistant professor of statistics in the College of Nursing at the University of South Florida. My research interests include educational methods, and health equity. I have experience in data analysis for various types of research designs.Dr. Zachariah J Beasley P.E., University of South Florida Dr. Zachariah Beasley received his Ph.D. in Computer Science and Engineering from the University of South Florida with a focus on sentiment analysis in peer review. He is the
IKC Value rubric was used to code thestudent reflections. The results of the study demonstrated that living in the learning communityand studying the concepts of intercultural competence while interacting with students of diversebackgrounds allowed the students to develop interculturally. Also, engaging students in guidedreflection helped them to reflect on the intercultural skills that they developed through constantinteraction with peers that requires efficient communication among the team members. Similarly,in another study by Swartz et al. [13], students were challenged to collaborate internationally withstudents from three different countries during a 6-week project to increase their interculturalcompetency. The results of the study
), an HSI in the State University of New York (SUNY) system. In year one, Cohort Apiloted the PD modules in Tier 1 which featured reflective exercises and small culturallyresponsive activities to try with their STEM students. In year two, Cohort A piloted the PDmodules in Tier 2 and peer-mentored Cohort B as they piloted optimizations introduced to Tier 1from Cohort A feedback. Three types of optimizations came from faculty feedback. The firstconsidered feedback regarding delivery and/or nature of the content that influenced a subsequentmodule. The second involved making changes to a particular module before it was delivered toanother faculty cohort. The third takes into account what worked and what didn’t to decidewhich content to bring into
pedagogy literature for guidance.Students’ struggles with programming and data analysis are not new. In the 1990s active learningin computer science consisted of mini-lectures, handouts containing work-out examples, andclass time where students worked independently on projects [7]. This popular method of teachingprogramming evolved over time with new strategies being suggested and tested [8,9]. One suchmethod is pair programming where students work in pairs at a single computer and periodicallyswitch seats and roles [8]. Another method is live coding where the professor writes code in frontof the class while interacting with students [10]. In addition to challenges in teachingprogramming, teaching statistics has its own challenges and
expand on prior work where the students discussed whatUDL and learner-centeredness are and why these are essential additions to academia and learning(Wiitablake, Eanochs et al., 2022). As such, the lead author asked those who have participated orare currently participating in the grant as part of the Collaborative Design Team to reflect ontheir experiences with the project. The idea was to leave the task open for interpretation, thoughprompts were supplied to all students to get started with the writing. In addition, meetings wereset up as-needed, with students being able to choose whether or not they needed additionalguidance from the Research Assistant. These approaches allowed the students to take theinitiative in the writing process and
Research-Course Design,” CBE—Life Sci. Educ., vol. 14, no. 4, p. ar37, Dec. 2015, doi: 10.1187/cbe.15-03-0073.[32] A. B. Inoue, Labor-Based Grading Contracts: Building Equity and Inclusion in the Compassionate Writing Classroom. The WAC Clearinghouse; University Press of Colorado, 2019. doi: 10.37514/PER-B.2019.0216.0.Appendix[after peer review we plan to include the syllabus developed for the M-CURE course, but it is full ofauthor identity information so has been removed for now]
poster session to promote formativefeedback from peers and project advisors [7]. The consortium is unfortunately no longer active.The Comprehensive Assessment of Team Member Effectiveness (CATME) project developshigh-quality assessment tools for teamwork, and eases data collection and analysis through aweb-based interface [8]. It would be beneficial if a consortium similar to TIDEE could be formedto develop ways to assess each ABET student outcome; by involving experts in educationalmeasurement, and by automating the data collection process, such a consortium could makeassessment more valid and less arduous.In this paper, we refer to the Engineering Accreditation Commission of ABET simply as ABET.We work from the premise that the seven ABET
discoveries in the form of progress reports that aresubmitted to the industrial collaborators and federal funding agency sources at the end of eachsemester. The students also learn to use citation software and publish their work in peer-reviewed journals.As researchers, it is important to contribute to the literature on these new advances in arespective field. Conference presentations provide the students with the opportunity of presentingtheir data at various stages of development (preliminary findings, most up-to-date findings, andfuture directions). This allows them to gain constructive criticism from colleagues and polishtheir findings before final documentation. Furthermore, it allows the students to meet otherresearchers and learn the
responsibility to generate and disseminate knowledge with rigor and integrity, but also a responsibility to: o conduct peer review with the highest ethical standards, o diligently protect proprietary information and intellectual property from inappropriate disclosure, o and treat students and colleagues fairly and with respect.” [14]While the natural environment may be of concern to individual engineering researchers,these homocentric codes of engineering ethics are still rooted in the mechanistic thinkingof the 17th century, where reference to non-human animals is largely omitted. There areethical guidelines for research involving animals, but they may warrant reconsideration,given new developments and debates over
perceptions of engineering and to evaluate these programs and activities [3]. The Draw a ScientistTest (DAST) [4] and Draw an Engineer Test (DAET) [5] are two tools that use drawings to assess howstudents see themselves as engineers before they are able to articulate their thoughts in writing. Roboticsis an engineering discipline that suffers from a distinct lack of diversity both in who participates in K12programs and later who enters traditional engineering majors associated with robotics [6]. Recently, softrobotics, the sub-discipline focused on soft material designs for wearable robots, has been used as aplatform to attract more students to robotics with new materials [7], bioinspired designs [8], and human-centered applications [9]–[11]. To
the university, the students take 15 courses including courses in art,cultural diversity, history, literature, mathematics, natural science, philosophy, social sciences, theology,and writing. The students also complete courses to graduate with a B.S. in General Engineering. Inaddition to the liberal arts core courses and engineering courses, all students also participate in a weeklyone-hour reflection seminar that they are enrolled in along with their peers in the same cohort. An aim forthe pedagogy and curriculum in the courses coded as engineering and the reflection seminars is to utilizethe affordances of a liberal arts framing to engineering to provide students opportunities to experience aliberal engineering education more
discussed and resolved, resulting in 100% agreement in coding. Moredetails about the development of the codes is provided in the next section.Development of CodesAfter all 10 of the recorded interviews had been completed, a thematic analysis was conductedthrough multiple views of each video. Throughout the videos, key moments were identified astimes where students were actively engaging with or describing their thinking around the tasks.This meant that times when students were reading the directions or writing their responses on theactivity sheet were not considered key moments. After repeated viewings and analyticaldescriptions of the key moments in videos were compiled, themes were developed. Studentsbroadly engaged with the problems using either
with the lowest rate of degree earners with adisability was engineering (8.2%) [14]. Additionally, the National Science Foundation [15]reports that disabled scholars receive less funding and had lower employment rates than theirnon-disabled peers, and the National Institute of Health (NIH) [16] found that the percentage ofdisabled people in professional STEM fields grew only 3% (from 6% to 9%) between 1999 and2019, but that the number of people in STEM fields overall increased approximately 79% since1990 [17]. Poignantly, research has also shown that there is a significant disparity betweendisabled STEM students who have dominant identities and those who have what are consideredmultiply-minoritized identities, particularly feminine presenting
and research aresupported by award funding from various organizations. They often are directed to womenwithout considering WOC's unique challenges. For example, ADVANCE is a fund that invests infaculty success by exploring and establishing institution-based support programs and strategiesto enhance the climate and institutional context encountered by faculty women in engineering[10]. These initiatives may warrant a different structure at different institutions, such as minority-serving institutions (MSIs), in keeping with institutional missions and demographics. Specific toMSI, Allen et al. [11] proffered that institutional transformation must assist women faculty inSTEM by providing support to develop writing and research skills, networking
of S&E bachelor’s degrees were awarded to women in 2018—women’srepresentation varies greatly by field and women are still underrepresented in S&E occupations”[1]. While representation of some student populations has seen an increase in the past decades(e.g., Latinx/Hispanic students have seen an increase in share of Science and EngineeringBachelor’s degrees awarded from 8% in 2008 to 12% in 2018 [1]), others have been stagnatingor declining (e.g., Black and African American students changing from 4.7% to 4.3% from 2008to 2018 [1]).Underrepresentation affects students’ ways of experiencing engineering education and practiceand creates unique sets of challenges compared to their majority-representing peers. Experiencessuch as “cold
studentcohort model (for each incoming group of students) and also providing supports to buildcommunity across cohorts as well as including students’ families in their college experiences,our program aimed to increase student satisfaction and academic success. We recruited twocohorts of nine incoming students each across two years, 2019 and 2020; 69% of participantswere from underrepresented racial or minority groups and 33% were women. Each participantwas awarded an annual scholarship and given co-curricular support including peer and facultymentoring, a dedicated cohort space for studying and gathering, monthly co-curricular activities,enhanced tutoring, and summer bridge and orientation programs. Students’ families were alsoincluded in the
should join, and any differences between the two.The research questions that guided this study were: RQ1: How do undergraduate engineering students perceive the amount of time spent engaging in engineering clubs? RQ2: Why are undergraduate engineering students motivated to join engineering clubs? RQ3: What are the perceived benefits of engineering club participation?Students are motivated to join engineering clubs to find community with peers [3], applyknowledge to real-world settings [4], prepare for their careers [5], develop new skills [6], [7],and pursue personal interests [8]. Design clubs (both competition and impact-focused teams)provide additional opportunities to practice the design process [9], manufacture parts
engineering students to work effectively in teams, writing that“because of the increasing complexity and scale of systems-based engineering problems, there isa growing need to pursue collaborations with multidisciplinary teams of experts across multiplefields” [1, pp. 34–35]. ABET has similarly dedicated one of its seven student outcomes toteamwork, wording it as: “An ability to function effectively on a team whose members togetherprovide leadership, create a collaborative and inclusive environment, establish goals, plan tasks,and meet objectives” [2]. Research studies have also repeatedly underlined the importance ofdeveloping engineering students’ abilities to work in teams to meet industry needs [3], [4].As a result, there has been an increased
2003,with many students only graduating after a period of 10 years. On average, the completion ratesfor engineering doctoral programs after 3 to 4 years were just below 20% [3]. Hasbun et al. [4]found that for many students, coursework can be an external motivator as it imposes deadlinesand encourages them to interact with fellow students. Whereas, students perceive the writingphase as the most difficult. Common concerns with this last portion of the doctoral programinclude not having the necessary writing skills to communicate effectively, while beingchallenged to publicly demonstrate competence. Many students also shared concerns regardingtime management, questioning their abilities (personal and academic), isolation, and the expectedtime
thinkingand other General Education objectives addressed in the course. Following the completion of thecourse materials, a curricular course proposal was submitted to UFS and underwent consultationprocedures. Ultimately, the proposal was approved by UFS in April 2018 and the course wasoffered to students for the first time in the fall of the same year.Throughout the course, students had access to a variety of fluid apparatus and were encouragedto experiment with creating novel flows. Each image produced by the students was required to beaccompanied by a write-up, which some of the art students found surprising. The student workwas then evaluated for both artistic and scientific merit, with an emphasis on developing anappreciation for the beauty of
inindustry.The Peer Mentors (Peer Mentoring is discussed later in this paper) are invaluable in providingfeedback from the students on how the first-year classes are going, as viewed from the studentperspective.One additional adjustment in our Program was to expand our two introductory courses,Introduction to Data Science and Role of Data Science in Today’s World, from one- and two-credit hour courses, respectively, to three-credit hours each. They were originally designed thatway but were reduced to fit in another course whose content has been folded into other courses.This has resulted in minor changes to the first two years of the 8-semester plan. At the sametime, this change has allowed us to expand the Introduction and Role courses to the
research productivity (e.g., papers published). However, weacknowledge that excellent undergraduate research experiences often lead to peer-reviewed publicationsand help faculty career progression.In partnership with the Kern Entrepreneurial Engineering Network (KEEN), a workshop has been held forfour summers to help faculty integrate the entrepreneurial mindset (EM) into their work with researchstudents. We are interested in exploring the impact of this work on participation and sharing our findingswith the broader engineering community.Research questions: 1. How can faculty use an EM to adjust their approach to research activities and student mentoring? 2. What structures/practices from the workshop help faculty adjust their approach to
influenceneurodivergent students’ sense that they need to work harder and longer than other students.Several participants mentioned experiencing imposter syndrome, which may be described as thefeeling that one is a fraud despite one’s accomplishments [47]. And even though many graduatestudents may experience imposter syndrome at some point in their career, these feelings likelyplace a heavy burden on neurodivergent graduate students who may feel pressure to hide theirchallenges to prove that they belong in academia. As Ó Meadhbh Murray et al. [47] write,“Students expend time and energy doing emotional work to navigate imposter feelings withmarginalized students experiencing more persistent and intense imposter feelings than their moreprivileged peers, often in
postsecondary campuses, instructional development programs are typically offered by theteaching and learning centres of universities and colleges. These campus-wide programs, alongwith engineering-specific programs, are usually available to faculty members and graduatestudents in engineering. Possible structures of these programs can be workshops, courses, andseminar series; consulting, mentoring, and partnering arrangements’ learning communities; andteaching certification programs [6]. Other professional development activities for teachingimprovement include reading literature, or writing an article or chapter on teaching, learning orassessment, and attending an engineering education conference [7]. These efforts were found tobe positively related to
draw upon theirLinguistic, Familial, and Social Capitals more readily when compared to non-First-Generationstudents (see Table 5). The understanding and belief that First-Generation students possessunique cultural resources to their peers are evident in many other additional studies [Verdin &Godwin, 2015] and our survey results suggest these differences are emergent in the Linguisticand Familial capitals they possess and leverage.First-Generation students readily draw upon their Linguistic Capital assets as it relates to having(and sensing importance) to speak or write about engineering in more than one language (ItemsB and H). Moreover, First-Generation students tend to agree that it is necessary to speak or writeabout engineering in more
research interests and ac- tivities center on gaining a better understanding of the process-structure-property-performance relations of structural materials through advanced multiscale theoretical framework and integrated computational and experimental methods. To date, Dr. Liu has published nearly 250 peer reviewed publications, includ- ing more than 130 peer reviewed journal articles, and received 2 patents. He has been the PI and co-PI for over 40 research projects funded by NSF, DOD, DOE, NASA, FAA, Louisiana Board of Regents, and industry with a total amount over $15.5M. Dr. Liu has served on review panels for many NSF, DOD, NASA, and DOE programs. Dr. Liu received the Junior Faculty Researcher of the Year of the
not appear to weigh it as an absolute sine qua non for a favorable tenure decision.Another takeaway is that many schools may still be evolving their criteria, as several suggest thatthere are no specific written guidelines, and yet a predominant culture of what constitutessufficient scholarly productivity exists.Herewith their comments:Schools not requiring grant activity: 1) I typically can give up to ~$25K in start up funding (from Academic Affairs), and can also help acquire specialized equipment that is necessary for their research that does not count against their start up (from School of Engineering funds). . . Grant writing is strongly encouraged, but not required for us. . . For tenure, they must be excellent