Paper ID #42184Lessons Learned: Summer Book Club to Promote Reflection among EngineeringFaculty on Mental Health of StudentsLuis Delgado Jr., Penn State University Luis R. Delgado Jr. is a Ph.D. Candidate in the Mechanical Engineering Department at Pennsylvania State University. He has a bachelor of science in Mechanical Engineering from The University of Texas at El Paso and earned a master of science degree in Civil Engineering with a minor in Public Policy from Penn State. Along with his role as a Ph.D., he is also a graduate research assistant at the Leonhard Center for Enhancement of Engineering Education at Penn
assess and reconstruct their professional practices that influence their mindset andreform engineering education.Introduction Critical consciousness is an advanced educational pedagogy to liberate the masses fromsystemic inequity maintained and perpetuated by interdependent systems and institutions (Freire,1970; Jemal, 2017). It is often situated in the context of analyzing oppressive systemic forcesusing the cyclic process of critical reflection, critical motivation, and critical action. Critical reflection is defined as the process of individuals analyzing their reality andsocial inequities (e.g., economic, racial/ethnic, and gender inequities) that constrain well-beingand human agency. Authors argue that individuals who are
activity–has been identified as an essential component forinstructional effectiveness [5]-[7] with highlights to the experience of mastery and socialpersuasion [7],[8]. This suggests that effective support for faculty should consist of learningcommunities that build supportive relationships between members, encourage critical reflection,and include opportunities for research partnerships [9].Faculty Communities of PracticesIn work focusing on educational and leadership development, Drago-Steverson [10] shares thateffective faculty development experiences allow faculty to experience conditions that supportadult learners through meaningful shared activities. Such activities enable faculty to experiencetransformational learning–learning that grows
processing between meetings, (2) group discussion and processing of ourexperiences at our bi-weekly meetings, and (3) at the conclusion of the term, an iterative processof individual and collaborative review of our reflections and notes to identify and thematicallyorganize key observations and results.Our Stories (In Brief)Each of us came to Purdue University in the Fall of 2023 from private, teaching-intensiveinstitutions with enrollments between 2,500 and 3,500 students. We differed in our depth ofteaching and industry experience, which is summarized in Table 1.Table 1. Prior Teaching and Industry Experience of the Authors Author Teaching Experience Industry Experience Steve Assistant Professor (NTT
a humanistic approach to educating students. This humanistic approachacknowledges the importance of the affective side of teaching and learning. Engineering, whichshares many of the highly technical, decision-making aspects of nursing, could benefit from thisapproach for engineering education.Our ProgramOur team developed a Community of Practice (CoP) informed by a humanistic-educative caringframework, grounded in Caring Science, where the curriculum is about the process and intent tolearn coming from the interactions and transactions between faculty and learners. Thisframework embraces openness, human discovery, and deep reflection [4]. It also includesawareness of how learning works and co-creating meaningful learning experiences that
outcomes. Scholarssuch as Felder and Brent have emphasized the importance of disciplined inquiry into teachingmethodologies to improve the learning experiences of engineering students especially related toactive learning [6], [7]. SoTL allows educators to systematically investigate effectiveinstructional strategies and assess their impact on student learning. Previous research hasunderscored the transformative potential of SoTL emphasizing its role in shaping curriculardesign and facilitating evidence-based teaching approaches [8]. Reflective practice and practicedissemination, two key components of SoTL, holds the potential to accelerate growth not only atthe micro (classroom) level but also at the meso (institutional) and macro (national
, completion,and placement rates [9]. Study PurposeIn response, the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) Accelerator program (a newengineering faculty professional development program) was created, implemented, and assessed;funding was provided by the Kern Family Foundation and Arizona State University Mentorship360 Program. The SoTL Accelerator program had two core parts (Figure 1): (1) New CurriculumDevelopment, Implementation, and Assessment, and (2) Reflection and Dissemination ofFindings. The SoTL Accelerator program was delivered in a virtual, structured, cohort manner topromote accessibility, accountability, and a sense of belonging. The purpose of this paper is toprovide an overview, results, and lessons learned from 30
) recruitment and incentives for engagement in TA training. Bysharing these models, readers will be able to intentionally reflect on their own training programs,consider components of our practices that could be incorporated into their own contexts, andultimately serve future faculty in other institutions.1. Institutional ContextTraining teaching assistants is a relatively new practice in higher education, and the catalyst forprograms differs in the US and UK. In the US, there are no standardized guidelines at the federallevel for teacher preparedness in higher education whereas the training that Imperial CollegeLondon conducts in the UK is largely informed by national government mandate. The DearingReport of 1997 [5] provided a formal blueprint for
unaware of the discipline of engineering education.As an effort to raise more awareness on the impact of engineering education research andpractice, the authors’ positionality stemmed from their reflections of their entry points into thefield of engineering education. This introspection prompted the authors to explore and share asmuch information about the discipline as was available at the time of this work.Research Approach & DesignThis exploratory study thoroughly investigated the current state of engineering education as adiscipline in the U.S. via an online content analysis of institutional or departmental websites tofind information about the faculty members working in the respective institutions. The sectionsand pages of ‘Faculty
intertwined with the cultural wealthframework, which is situated with transnational framework, to explore the experiences ofinternational faculty in U.S. higher education institutions, particularly in the fields of science andengineering. Auto-ethnography[14], [15], as a method, allows researchers to use their ownexperiences as primary data, offering a deep, introspective understanding of the culturalphenomena under investigation. This approach is particularly suited to our study as it enables eachco-author to draw upon their personal narratives, reflecting their journey as international facultyin the U.S., thereby providing an authentic, first-person perspective on the challenges andopportunities they encounter. We did not use any prompts while
observation underscores the importance of addressing financial barriers andenhancing accessibility to ensure broader and more inclusive participation in future FDS events.Regarding repeat participants, our impact extends to a remarkable 182 faculty members andsoon-to-be faculty who have participated in the last eight events, as illustrated in Figure 2. Thisbroad reach is reflected in the representation of over 154 universities, underscoring thesymposium's national influence and effectiveness in engaging a diverse academic community.Each year, we actively strive to broaden our reach by extending invitations to a widening arrayof institutions and faculty members. Notably, in 2023, we achieved our highest attendance in asingle event, with 46
encounters andexistential reflections, thereby guiding their educational philosophy and praxis [8, 9,10]. Within the scope of this study, “teaching belief” is understood as the ingrainedconvictions held by educators about their pedagogical duties, student engagements,curricular substance, and the comprehensive process of instruction, which ultimatelydirect their didactic ideologies and methodologies. The efficacy of classroom evaluation practice is well-documented, with substantialevidence highlighting its pivotal role in enhancing student achievement and fosteringan intrinsic motivation to pursue academic objectives [11, 12]. This analysis delineatesevaluation not only as a multifaceted political dynamic within the classroomenvironment but also
(%) 40 30 30 20 20 10 0 0-3 4-6 10 and above Years of ExperienceFigure 1: Years of experience of Faculty membersThe big five personality traits were considered in the present study. Among the five, only threewere common among the faculty participants. The self-identified personality of the participantswas presented in Figure 2. The study defined conscientiousness as "reflecting the tendency to beaccountable, structured, diligent, goal-oriented, and to adhere to norms and rules" for a facultymember who self
potential contributionsto the typology of effective teaching strategies. The study is anchored by a research question:what student-centered teaching approaches do exemplary engineering instructors employ topromote knowledge-building in their courses, and how do these approaches align with theirbeliefs about teaching?Data CollectionTo address the research question, the study employed the participatory action research (PAR)methodology, which prioritizes the invaluable input and expertise of participants. The PARapproach is best suited for this study because it actively improves social practices [10], involvingparticipants in designing data collection, reflecting on data, and testing identified practices intheir own contexts. A diverse group of
debrief and reflection. By experiencingmultiple live ACLs and follow-up discussions, the participants gained an appreciation for thepre-course preparation necessary, the length of class time necessary, and an idea of whichtechniques might work (or not work) for them. One thing to note is that, just like our students,faculty may tend to look ahead at class material. For this reason, the facilitators used a “just intime” method to release notes and handouts.4. TemplatesTwo types of templates were distributed to and used by the participants. The first was a fillabletemplate that contained all the elements of a well-structured ACL that aided in determining thetime allotted for the module, team size, student deliverables, assessment technique, etc
in the first coding cycle [12], analyzingthe data for relevance to the research questions. The second and third coding cycles progressedbased on analyzing data for connections to the proposed theoretical framework. The resultingcodebook was developed by the autoethnographer in consultation with the research collaboratorfor confirmation of emerging themes, sensemaking, and suggestions for additional probing.Part of the analysis journey also included reflections on the autoethnographer’s transitionalexperiences outside those articulated during the interview. These reflections are recorded inanalytical memos written throughout the analysis process, starting from interview transcription.This additional data allowed the researchers to explore in
simultaneously. Most of these foreign nationals areeventually naturalized and become citizens. While the immigration status of these faculty istransitional, their specific cultural and racial identity carries forward. Unfortunately, theclassification of these individuals in URM/Non-URM status is complicated [25], as 1) the URMdefinition used by NSF is based on underrepresentation in STEM fields relative to the overall U.S.population, but FB faculty are drawn from the world population where the ethnic groups adverselyaffected by systemic inequities may or may not align with the U.S. definitions; 2) FB faculty ofBlack and Hispanic backgrounds are included in URM, which raises the number of URM facultybut does not reflect an improvement in the including of
conclusions or recommendations expressed in thismaterial are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National ScienceFoundation. References[1] Excelencia in Education (2023a). “Hispanic–serving institutions (HSIs): 2021–22,” 2023.[Online]. Available: https://www.edexcelencia.org/media/2105[2] A. M. Núñez, J. Rivera, J. Valdez, and V. B. Olivo. “Centering Hispanic-serving institutions’strategies to develop talent in computing fields,” Tapuya: Latin American Science, Technologyand Society, vol., 4, no. 1, 1842582, 2021.[3] B.L. Scott, S. M. Muñoz, and S. B. Scott. “How whiteness operates at a Hispanic ServingInstitution: A qualitative case study of faculty, staff, and