challenges, this study amplifies the clarioncall for fostering participation and inclusivity in engineering doctoral programs.IntroductionPromoting diversity within the engineering workforce is a critical national priority, underscoringthe need for broader participation and the cultivation of inclusivity [1]. The infusion of diversityinto the field of civil engineering in the United States yields numerous advantages, including amultifaceted project perspective, heightened project value, the enrichment of knowledge, talent,and ideas, access to expansive networks, and the production of superior final products necessaryfor global competitiveness in infrastructure [2]. Consequently, achieving this imperative requiresa comprehensive examination of the
science education nonprofits.Emily L. Atieh, Stevens Institute of Technology ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 Graduate student perceptions of community building as a precursor to active learningAbstract:Active learning is widely understood to improve student outcomes, yet many active learningimplementation efforts are focused only on undergraduate courses [1], [2], [3]. Factors that mayinhibit active learning implementation in graduate courses include the belief that “rigor” andlecturing should go hand-in-hand in higher level courses, or a lack of community building morecommonly seen in undergraduate programs. Here, we present an exploratory study that uses
original version of the course are surveyed to gain insights on the topics they perceive wouldbe beneficial in the redesigned course which will contribute to the ongoing improvements to thenew course. This paper will also provide details on the course structure and topics along withlessons learned from the initial implementation.IntroductionIt is known that graduate school can be difficult and isolating, and dropout rates are high. As of2008, the Council of Graduate Schools found in their study that after 10 years only 65% of malesand 56% of females had completed their engineering doctoral program [1]. At the NationalConference on Graduate Student Leadership 2003, the report on “Bringing a Sense ofCommunity to Grad Student Life” stressed the
a chemical engineer, it is$106,260 [1]. This 30% difference in yearly income holds more significant implications overone's lifetime. This marked difference in earning potential serves as a key factor influencing ashift in career trajectory, occurring either before or after undergraduate studies. Unfortunately,many students overlook crucial aspects such as job salary and availability when selecting theirundergraduate major. While personal interest often guides this choice, studies reveal that familialand peer pressure also plays a substantial role [2,3], leading students to pursue majors that maynot align with their passion or offer favorable job prospects and income. While more than 30%of undergraduate students regret their initial major
programs. However, after admission, the problem ofretention becomes salient for underrepresented minority groups (URMs) in academia 1 . As youngBlack engineers continue to enter advanced graduate studies, it becomes important to examine thefactors that impact how they enter and ultimately decide to leave the institution. In this work, weused the autoethnographic method to share our experiences and illustrate the issues faced by BlackPhD students at elite research institutions. We relate our experiences chronologically starting withthe expectations from peers once arriving on campus, moving into the expectation of solving auniversity’s equity problems, and ending with the mental burdens of coping with an unhealthywork environment. All of these
: A Decade of Experiences in Design, Execution and Creating Value for EmployersIntroductionWholesale Distribution in the United States is more than an 8.2 trillion-dollar industry, withmore than 300,000 businesses that employ six million people [1]. The wholesale trade accountedfor about 6% of the GDP in 2021 and is presently one of the top 6 sectors of the U.S. economy.The growth of a distribution organization does not rely solely on the distributor’s geographicreach, physical assets, product selection, or access to capital. It also depends on its humancapital. In fact, all organizations require human capital to accomplish their goals; therefore, theorganization’s ability to manage its human capital is key to its business success
ofpreparation decreases the likelihood that graduates will obtain these competitive positions.Providing more focused preparation can also reduce barriers to entering academia, increasingboth the number and diversity of qualified candidates.To provide students with such preparation, a seminar series was offered in Spring 2022 andSpring 2023 and was organized and co-taught by two or three faculty members as a serviceactivity and not part of their teaching load. SEA consisted of three topic areas: (1) informationabout academic careers and pathways, (2) application process and materials, and (3) interviewprocess and expectations. For the first two topic areas, most of the seminars were led by the co-instructors, while for the final topic area of the series
departments have always praised him for his outstanding teaching and research excellence. He has been involved in numerous professional societies to supplement his teaching and research, including ASCE, ACI, ASEE, ASC, ATMAE, and TRB. His research output has been well disseminated as he has published 100+ journal papers and conference papers. His research interests are 1) Creating Innovative Sustainable Materials, 2) Digital Construction, 3) BIM and VDC, 4) Virtual Testing Lab, 5) Construction Education, and 6) Sustainability.Kathryn Bedette AIA, Kennesaw State UniversityGiovanni Loreto, Kennesaw State University Giovanni Loreto is an Assistant Professor in the College of Architecture and Construction Management at the
has been increasing over the past decade,yet women still only occupied 35% of the STEM jobs in 2021 [1]. Regarding degree attainment,the National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics expressed that women are particularlyunderrepresented within most STEM programs [1]. Interestingly, there was a steady increase inthe number of women earning a bachelor’s in engineering—more than a 100% increase between2011 and 2020. However, despite this increase, women were only representing a fraction of all ofthose who earned a bachelor’s (24%), master’s (27%), and doctoral (25%) degree in engineeringin 2020 [1]. A master’s or doctoral degree is important to attain when considering careeropportunities and advancement [1]. However, as Beck et al
Graduate StudentsAbstractThe first year of graduate school can produce great angst in students undertaking a fundamentalidentity shift from student to researcher [1]. In interdisciplinary programs, acquiring confidencewith an additional disciplinary framework and threshold concepts brings additional challenges[2]. Solutions often focus on mentoring [3], but students entering highly interdisciplinarygraduate programs may need additional support that helps them integrate the unique challengesfaced by students changing or integrating multiple disciplinary backgrounds and identities. Wepropose that formalizing career path exploration, with an emphasis on surfacing students’ angstabout their options and career paths through a professional development
support for establishing collaborative efforts, underscores the necessity for a multi-faceted doctoral training approach to support doctoral students more effectively.We believe that the insights reported here will help in designing support systems that willempower faculty to contribute to the training of doctoral workforce for the benefit of society atlarge. It will also inform curriculum development and help prepare students better for a widerrange of career paths.1. IntroductionPhD training holds a crucial role in higher education within STEM disciplines, traditionallyfocusing on enhancing doctoral students' academic skills, including in-depth research on ascientific question or engineering problem, communication of newly generated knowledge
databases was based on our goal tosynthesize education-related literature within engineering by structuring a search that yieldsmultidisciplinary results. The systematized literature review included an initial screening of 567abstracts and resulted in the synthesis of 23 papers. We identified the characteristics and commongoals of these programs. The workforce training programs were classified into three themes: (1)personal qualities and abilities, (2) interpersonal skills, and (3) professional competencies.The findings shed light into: (1) the need to prepare engineering Ph.D. students in professionalskills, given its lack of mention in workforce training programs; (2) the efforts that have gone intopreparing engineering Ph.D. students in cutting
thatis narrowly focused on research skills, adapts slowly to emerging trends, and provides professionaldevelopment primarily for academic careers. This approach limits an institution's ability to preparestudents for the requirements of the 21st-century workplace, which increasingly requires students totranslate their knowledge beyond traditional disciplinary boundaries and pursue novel opportunities byswitching jobs. [1] Further, it largely disregards that students have different starting points upon enteringthe graduate program, which reflects not only the student's academic preparation but other aspects oftheir background (e.g., socioeconomic, sociocultural, prior work experience, professional development),resulting in a lack of inclusivity.In
. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 1 Development of a Climate Survey for Engineering Doctoral Students from an Intersectional Approach: First-Round Validity EvidenceAbstractThis study reported on the development procedures for a multi-factor organizational climatesurvey for engineering doctoral student retention. Engineering doctoral programs are a type oforganization, and the perceptions of program members can be understood through organizationalclimate science. From this perspective, organizational climate measurement can guideresearchers and leaders in better understanding the specific climates affecting the experiences
industry. The National Association ofColleges and Employers (NACE) reinforces this, highlighting communication as a criticalcompetency for career readiness. The NACE Career Competencies include Critical Thinking,Communication, Teamwork, Technology, Leadership, Professionalism, Career and Self-Development, and Equity and Inclusion. NACE advocates for skills like active listening,persuasion, and adapting to diverse communication styles [1]. These communication skillsbecome even more valuable when young professionals convey complex scientific ideas, fosterinnovation, and collaborate in the workplace. Employers recognize this skill as vital for thrivingin today's diverse professional environment. Therefore, by excelling in scientific communication
. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 1 Cultural Adaptation and Advising Dynamics: Insights from International Engineering Graduate StudentsAbstractThis research study is step one in exploring cultural considerations affecting advising dynamicsbetween advisors and international Ph.D. students in engineering disciplines in the United States.The study draws from the Intercultural Competence Framework as the theoretical lens. It collectsdata from four international PhD students in engineering at one public institution by employingsemi-structured interviews. Further, the results concentrate on the need to
achieve a given goal in an efficient and expeditious manner” [1, p.7]- are criticallyimportant for any STEM career. These skills frequently are expected of those who seek careersin industry. Undergraduate students may be introduced to these skills if they major inengineering or have internship experiences in industry; however, these skills are rarely taught atthe graduate level. Graduate education primarily focuses on developing skills required for theacademy (i.e., research, grant writing) and often overlook other skills that are more critical tosuccess in professions in the industry. Over the past decades, students have increasingly beenseeking positions outside the academy, opting, instead, to work in the industry [2]. STEMemployers seek
(VTECC). Her research focuses on communication, collaboration, and identity in engineering. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 Understanding Ecosystems of Interdisciplinary Graduate Education through an Ecological Systems ApproachAbstract esponding to decades of calls for interdisciplinary scholars capable of addressing complexRsocietal challenges[1], [2], [3], this conference paper addresses persistent gaps in interdisciplinary graduate education reform. Despite extensive research on transformational interdisciplinary graduate education, little change has been made in reshaping governing funding, policies, and program structures as well as disciplinary
“Research guided only by the controlling yardstick of profit undermines the role of the universityas a public sphere dedicated to addressing the most serious social problems a society faces.Moreover, the corporate model of research instrumentalizes knowledge and undermines forms oftheorizing, pedagogy, and meaning that define higher education as a public good rather than as aprivate good” [1]. -Henry GirouxIntroductionWhat has been coined as a crisis in graduate education, is evidenced primarily by 1) highattrition rates and 2) a mental health crisis among graduate students [2], [3]. The issue of attritionis of interest to various stakeholders including faculty
Our research paper examines the role of climate (e.g., interactions with others) in the skilldevelopment of engineering and physical science doctoral students. Skill development ingraduate school often occurs related to students’ primary funding mechanism, in which theymight interact with a research group or teaching team. Advisors also play a pivotal role in theengineering doctoral student experience; however, less is known about how positive mentoringinfluences skill development for engineering doctoral students. We investigated the followingresearch questions: 1) How, if at all, do interactions with advisor(s), faculty, and peers predict skill development (associated with primary funding mechanism) for engineering and physical
eliminate the requirement to submit GREscores (called “test optional”), or even to prohibit their use in admissions decisions. This papersummarizes the arguments for and against the use of standardized tests in general, and the GREin particular. The GRE provides a comparison that is at least facially objective, though scoresmay be influenced by factors such as test anxiety. GRE scores seem to predict outcomes likeGPA and degree completion, but different surveys and statistical methods lead to differentconclusions. The GRE may enable programs to better target their admission offers to studentswho can succeed, but it may also discourage minority applications.1. IntroductionEvery graduate program desires—or should desire—to admit only students who
, professionally, and technically and the mentor (graduate student and/orfaculty member/PI) gains valuable assistance with their research. Undergraduate researchmentoring can take on various forms, with varying levels of autonomy and control given to thegraduate student. When a graduate student serves as a mentor to the undergraduate researcher,the mentoring is described as a triad between the faculty member, graduate student, andundergraduate researcher with the graduate student serving as the “bridge” or intercessorbetween the faculty member and researcher [1]. Sometimes faculty are very hands off, leavingthe majority of decisions to the graduate student, such as the research topic, frequency ofmeeting, type guidance provided to the undergraduate. In
academic environment. We used thematicanalysis of the transcripts from 13 focus groups and 1 interview to examine the advisor-adviseerelationship as experienced by 31 students who identify as neurodiverse in graduate STEMprograms. The findings from this research highlighted several themes related to the importanceof communication in the relationship between neurodiverse students and their advisor. Thispaper focuses on three themes related to communication: Mutual Trust, Clear Expectations, andDelivery of Feedback. The findings suggest that these three elements of communication mayeither promote or hinder the success of neurodiverse graduate students in STEM programs,impacting disclosure of neurodiversity-related diagnoses, self-esteem, self
CRITL national and the Editorial Board for the Engineering Education Review an International Journal. ¨Michael M. Malschutzky, Hochschule Bonn-Rhein-Sieg, Germany Michael M. Malsch¨utzky is a Research Associate at the Centre for Teaching Development and Innovation (ZIEL) as well as Affiliate Faculty at the Department of Management Sciences at Hochschule Bonn-Rhein-Sieg, University of Applied Sciences (H-BRS), Germany. He received his Diplom-Ingenieur (FH) in Mechanical Engineering from H-BRS in 2005. After working as Test & Validation Engineer (TIER-1) and Program Management Engineer (OEM) in the automotive industry, he returned to academia in 2013, receiving his BSc (2017) and MSc (2023) in
graduate students totrain as interdisciplinary thinkers and produce innovative interdisciplinary research. This papermay also be a guide to current and future NRT programs to help them pursue elements of thetraineeship that are most effective.IntroductionAcademic departments often work in silos, thus giving fewer opportunities for graduate studentsand faculty from different departments to interact and for graduate students to gain the skillsneeded to do interdisciplinary research. Interdisciplinary research and collaboration have severalbenefits such as addressing complex research questions and social problems and having a moreproductive team [1] [2]. The National Science Foundation (NSF) has funded interdisciplinarytraining at the graduate
personal connections they may notshare with a more senior mentor. Near-peer mentors are often perceived as more in tune with thestruggles of their mentees [1] and more approachable than an individual who identifies as an“expert” scientist [2]. Examples of near-peer mentoring relationships in academia include anupper-level student and a first-year student, an undergraduate student and a graduate student, or agraduate student and a new faculty member. Near-peer mentoring can positively affect both the mentor and the mentee. Studentmentees have stated that they feel more comfortable asking a near-peer mentor for academic helpthan they do a professor [3] and believe access to near-peer mentors promotes success in theircoursework [4]. Students
communities in the United StatesAbstractThis paper shares and compares the experiences of initiating and sustaining two graduatestudent-led international ethnic engineering education scholarly communities for Chinese andAfrican groups. Our goal is to reflect on our lived experiences and inspire future students andacademics to cultivate such communities to broaden participation and enhance researchcapability. We adopt the Community of Practice (CoP) as the theoretical framework and opt forcomparative ethnographic narrative analysis as the method in this paper. Specifically, we focusedon the following dimensions of two communities led by the two authors: (1) the origin andpurpose; (2) the characteristics; and (3) practices. Our findings suggest that
to a certain extent, and the training mode has asignificant effect on the professional identity of PhD students in applied engineeringdisciplines, while it has no significant effect on PhD students in basic engineeringdiscipline.Conclusions: (1) There are differences in the professional identity of engineeringPhD students in through-type training and non-through training, and the professionalidentity of engineering PhD students in non-through training is higher. (2) There aredifferences in the professional identity of engineering PhD students of differenttraining types, and the higher the degree of coherence, the lower the performance ofprofessional identity. (3) There are differences in the professional identity ofengineering PhD students
literature review.Brief Literature ReviewHigher educational institutions in the United States continue to attract some of the best studentsworldwide, increasing the cultural diversity on our campuses. Despite their strong academicpreparation, international students face several obstacles, especially, in their first semester.Expressing their thoughts on paper, adjusting to the American educational system, and asking forhelp when needed, do not come naturally to some international students in their first semester inthe United States. Those who cannot adjust quickly may end up underperforming in their firstsemester. Gardner [1], and Kizilcec and Cohen [2] explain that generally, graduate studentsachieve academic success if they master time management
understand their own culturalpositioning, each other, and diverse ethnolinguistic marginalized communities that often suffer the mostfrom the deleterious effects of climate change. The paper will present the general design and structureof the six workshops and report the results from a rapid ethnographic assessment of the first cohortwho completed the workshops. Ongoing participant validation strategies were deployed, which thepaper reports from inductive coding and analysis of student class notes, interviews, and workshopplanning.INTRODUCTIONThe worldwide picture for our earth and all of us is grim according to the 2023 Report of theLancet Countdown on Health and Climate Change [1]. The report provides evidence thatclimate change is resulting in an