for dynamics analysis during the first half of the term. In the secondhalf of the term, the teams are focused on process control. Teams switch the type of experiment(liquid level or temperature control) by this second rotation, receiving the report on dynamicsanalysis from a previous team. Teams provide a critical review of the received report and decideon carry on with the models (Transfer function, ODE) derived by the previous team or adjustbefore moving into the process control analysis. Teams are also advised to structure leadershipand work in three areas: (1) documentation on equipment, instrumentation, and industrialapplications, (2) experimental plans, operation, data gathering, and analysis of results, and (3)computational modeling
with otherresearchers [9], [10], [11]. Students tend to enjoy REU programs and find them valuable inhelping direct their future plans, often including graduate school and further research [12], [13].Recent research argues for developing an entrepreneurial mindset (EM) in engineering students[14], [15], suggesting that it is crucial that BME programs, including research experiences,emphasize EM competencies [16], [17]. EM interventions in engineering education exist toenhance the traditional technical-focused education engineers receive and encourage well-rounded engineering graduates [14], [18]. Students exposed to EM interventions in researchexperiences expressed gaining confidence in business skills and value recognition [19], [20],which are
and manage the material and digital resources needed to turn ideas into action 2.3 Mobilizing • Make the most of limited resources Resources • Get and manage the competences needed at any stage, including technical, legal, tax and digital competences 2.4 Financial • Estimate the cost of turning an idea into a value-creating activity and Economic • Plan, put in place and evaluate financial decisions over time Literacy • Manage financing to make sure my value-creating activity can last over the
intentions foreshadow behaviors [15].Collaborating with Ajzen at the University of Illinois, the pair introduced subjective norms toincorporate how social dynamics affect intentionality, which culminating in the Theory ofReasoned Action (TRA) in 1980 [22]. The TRA’s usage spurred further studies into beliefs,norms, and behavioral expectations [23], [24]. In the mid-1980s, Ajzen extended the TRA’sapplicability with the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) [25], [26], [27], incorporatingperceived outcome control and other behavioral models [28], [29], [30]. The domain alsowitnessed practical applications of these theories during the AIDS epidemic, with governmentalbodies, including the National Institute of Mental Health, seeking behavioral
in our state, where they met with FEW stakeholders. In summer2023, NRT trainees traveled to a different region of our state, where they met with FEWstakeholders and visited a livestock farm, a dairy farm, and the wastewater treatment plant thatuses anaerobic to convert wastewater to biogas. The field experiences were organized in thesummer to avoid conflict with trainees’ course schedule and fall or spring breaks as well asconflict with producers harvesting or planting times. Transportation to the field sites and backwas provided from campus.To prepare NRT trainees to engage with policy that sustains the use of natural resources, NRTtrainees were introduced to different water management plans and learned how to engage withpolitical
stratification of China’s higher educationsystem is the differentiation between elite and non-elite universities. Elite universities aregenerally sponsored and administered by the Ministry of Education (MoE) or the centralgovernment, while non-elite universities are under the provincial or municipal level ofadministration. The premier status of Chinese elite universities can be best illustrated bythe Double First-Class University (DFCU) Plan[9]. ‘Double’ refers to both university anddiscipline. ‘First-Class’ refers to the objective of reaching the WCU standard. In 2022,there are 301,3 universities in China with only 147 of them (around 4.5%) being includedin the DFCU Plan[10].Thus, the elite universities in this study referred to those in theDFCU plan
medical device regulations, data Pedagogy Biomedical Engineering privacy laws, and clinical trial methodologies. Implementing case studies on medical device Practice design, simulations of data privacy scenarios, and hands-on clinical trial projects. Climate change, sustainability, infrastructure Policy policies. Focusing on sustainable construction materials, Pedagogy urban planning
Appendix section at the end ofthis article. In the first part, prompts focused on interns’ professional goals and interests, highschool academic environment, formulation of career pathways, influences and sources ofinformation, and other factors that influence career direction and professional identitydevelopment. In the second part, prompts focused on the students’ experiences while completingtheir projects, including influences of presentations and site visits, research design choices,obstacles, improvisation, or planning engaged to overcome obstacles or take advantage ofemerging opportunities, communication practices, interactions among interns and instructors,and other factors that relate to the ways engineering practice was enacted throughout
’ persistence through college and career are real.Students’ expectations of success were found to predict achievement and students’ beliefs in theimportance of engineering were found to predict career plans [19].To address these concerns, researchers have identified the impact of storytelling on students’empathy and self-identity [3], as well as their understanding of social disparities [20]. At GeorgiaTech, a dedicated course on storytelling in the biomedical engineering curriculum benefittedstudents by facilitating intentional development of identity and self-concept. As a result of thecourse, the instructors also found that students wanted to share their newfound ideas morebroadly [3]. In addition, the researchers compared self-reported measures for
practices wasto ensure a physically accessible and usable classroom for all students and to pre-plan for anyaccommodations for students whose needs are not fully met by a course’s instructional design.The second categorization groups the practices using the Aspire Alliance’s inclusive professionalframework core domains: identity, intercultural, and relational [12]. We chose these domains tofurther categorize the strategies because they contextualized the practices for specific situationsor focuses. For example, the practices in the intercultural domain focused on supporting studentconnections to content, encouraging students to be their authentic selves, and creatingopportunities for peers to connect [12]. We also developed a supporting
resources,and technology needs. However, with all the diverse learning sources, it becomes harder for stu-dents to comprehend a large amount of knowledge in a short period of time. Traditional assistivetechnologies and learning aids often lack the dynamic adaptability required for individualized ed-ucation plans. Large Language Models (LLM) have been used in language translation, text sum-marization, and content generation applications. With rapid growth in AI over the past years, AI-powered chatbots and virtual assistants have been developed. This research aims to bridge this gapby introducing an innovative study buddy we will be calling the ‘SAMCares’. The system leveragesa Large Language Model (LLM) (in our case, LLaMa-2 70B as the base model
network of educators who were interested in testing newways of learning in their STEM-adjacent classrooms, specifically career and technical educationcourses in urban planning and architecture. The teachers co-developed and integrated acommunity-based learning project focused on local neighborhood contexts into existing curriculaover a year. Neighborhoods of focus included those identified as infrastructure deserts in theexisting literature. Both teachers identified as women and were second-career teachers. They hadtransitioned into teaching from different professions and obtained teaching certifications whenemployed as classroom teachers. Both teachers departed public school teaching and transitionedinto advancing their studies as education
that has guided it are potentially useful for other engineeringeducators who seek to create transformative educational opportunities that promote inclusivity,equity, and social justice within the discipline of engineering. The following report first presentsthe developmental context and key foundations upon which the current version of the programhas been structured. Subsequently, a descriptive narrative is offered that includes organization& coordination of the community, opportunities & resources provided to participants, andperceived key benefits of the program based on the developer's perspective. A plan in progressfor additional data collection to steer another stage of research and change implementation isdiscussed. Finally
subdiscipline, 3) design an activity that gives students hands-on experiencetesting that physical concept.With this simple approach in mind, we planned one lecture and one lab for each module. Thelecture consisted of two components: 1) A broad overview of the civil engineering subdiscipline for that module, including discussion of the societal role played by practitioners of that subdiscipline, relevant and well-known projects, and examples of typical day-to-day responsibilities 2) A basic qualitative explanation of physical concepts relevant to that subdiscipline, emphasizing connections to other courses students might already be familiar with, such as chemistry and physicsWe designed hands-on lab
coordinator grew to be larger than one person could manageresulting in the position being split. The coordinator was promoted to assistant director, and anoffice support specialist was promoted to coordinator. Under this new administrative hierarchy,the assistant director was charged with focusing on long-term planning, supporting faculty, andcoordinating with units across campus, while the oversight of daily operations became theresponsibility of the coordinator. The CBTF assistant director takes input from an advisorycommittee of faculty and students and also consults with a student committee for feedback.Expanding Testing Capacity The CBTF is one of the most heavily utilized spaces on campusand we regularly receive inquiries from courses
phases: planning, monitoring, control, and reaction andreflection [3], [8]. The planning phase involves planning for the problem such as guidingquestions, making a concept map, or planning ahead as seen in [1, Tab. 1], [3]. The monitoringphase could have diagrams, prompts for self-explanation or reasoning, or cognitive feedbackdone by the student [3], [12]. In the control phase, there could be worked out examples,processing and reflective prompts, or guiding questions [3], [10]. Lastly, in the reflection phase,students reflect on the learning they’ve done [3], [13]. As previously mentioned, effectivescaffolds can be both domain-general and domain-specific in each phase. In the context ofcomputer-based learning environments, or CBLEs, prompts
) with an interest and aptitude for engineering and computing degree programs by offering an average of 23 scholarships per year over a 6-year period to at least 43 unique students. 2. Intentional Mentoring - Support scholars’ academic growth with faculty mentors who emphasize the use of an Individual Education and Development Plan to foster student growth and increase student outcomes for persistence, completion, and career aspirations. 3. Engagement in High Impact Practices - Engage scholars in high impact practices, including capstone projects, internships, and collaborative projects. 4. Professional Preparation - Foster professional preparation through common academic coursework, skills workshops, guest
documentation during experiments; (3) data analysis andinterpretation; and (4) communication of purpose, methods, and conclusions—contributes tostudents’ development. We conjecture that students having agency in planning the experimentaldesign (Domain 1) and in analysis of data (Domain 3) may matter more than having agencywhile performing the experiment (Domain 2).BackgroundStudents’ prior experiences in introductory chemistry courses, where cookbook style laboratoryexperiments are commonplace, can shape their expectations about upper division chemicalengineering laboratory courses [1]. In such courses, students commonly have agency only overdomain (2) data collection and documentation during experiments, as the experiment is designedfor them, a
, adjustment of elements of theirteaching on the spot. Engagement in the classroom can be difficult to study because of the widevariability in how engagement is defined, how types of engagement are distinguished, and howthese constructs are measured. While behavioral, emotional/affective, and cognitive engagementconstitute the heart of engagement [11] researchers have expanded these categories to includesocial-behavioral, volitional, and agentic engagement [11–12]. Past research on studentengagement in science and engineering classrooms centers around core scientific principles likeengagement through argumentation with evidence or working in groups while planning andtesting designs [12].Indicators of student engagement may look different in
Education Research Council . ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 Perception Study of an Online Electricity and Magnetism Course for Working StudentsAbstractTeaching basic sciences to engineering students online, specifically for "working students,"presents a unique challenge. It is contentious whether the conventional method ofinstruction employed in traditional daytime undergraduate programs is the most suitable forsuch a diverse group of students. Working students have limited time and energy due towork and family commitments, weak mathematical and conceptual foundations, and, formost of them, no plans for postgraduate studies or scientific research. This study
engineering-focused teacher practitioner articles, chapters, and research articles, and presents her research regularly through the ASEE Pre-College Engineering Education Division, a division she has chaired. Her current research includes investigating how children plan, fail, and productively persist; how mixed-reality simulated classroom environments can be used to help pre-service and in-service teachers practice facilitating challenging discussions in science and engineering; and how undergraduate engineering design teaching assistants address (and may be able to practice addressing) team conflict within similar simulated environments. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024
,resource constraints, and differing student goals contribute to nuanced responses, demonstratingthe complex considerations faculty members must navigate in shaping doctoral trainingexperiences.4.5. Unstructured commentsThe last question in the survey asked participants to provide additional information that theybelieved could enhance doctoral training. Two themes emerged from their responses. The firsttheme pertains to the refinement of academic course plans. For instance, one faculty memberhighlighted the need for a revision in academic coursework to incorporate more relevantproblem-solving, data analytics, and writing skills. This sentiment aligns with another suggestionemphasizing that academic courses often focus excessively on “technical
. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 Lessons Learned: “I Can’t Build It, Because They Won’t Come:” Faculty Survey Response Rates in Engineering Education ResearchObtaining faculty perspectives to enhance higher education teaching practices is an essential stepin assessing and planning professional development and training. However, procuring this crucialfeedback can often feel like an insurmountable challenge. In a recent research study aimed atgathering faculty feedback through an anonymous online survey, a notable revelation emerged –faculty members exhibit reluctance to participate in surveys. The question that arises is, how canwe gain an understanding of the collective faculty
. This section is still in development. This section aims to provide anassessment method that looks at the project's impact, developed through the PDC, on the students'understanding of the pre-defined course outcomes. Some measures being considered forassessment are course-specific student learning objectives and/or ABET student learningoutcomes.Future WorkThe PDC will continue to be developed and assessed for its effectiveness. Specifically, assessingthe impact of the PDC in reducing perceived barriers to implementing projects in courses byfaculty. Additionally, plans for evaluating the PDC’s effectiveness in helping to develop projectsare planned. To disseminate the PDC process to the larger STEM education community,workshops will be developed
topics course within our university’s engineering department, indicating a weekly averageof 2 hours of in-class time and 4 hours of homework. Through the course activities, students willdevelop a concrete plan for their (new or ongoing) advocacy work, and begin to enact this planwith support from both peers and instructors.Learning ObjectivesWe have developed the following Learning Objectives for the initial offering of the course.By participating, students will: • Identify their individual interests and strengths to integrate advocacy into their practice. • Articulate their scientific and/or engineering identity and how it relates to critical consciousness and their unique potential to shape the world. • Develop critical
ECR: BCSER program is to build a researcher’s capacity and expertise in STEMeducation research [10]. The author’s proposal titled “An Individual InvestigatorDevelopment Plan for Building Capacity to Study Undergraduate Latinas Interest inGraduate School” was selected for funding.Project ApproachThis NSF project incorporates capacity building through the “4 steps to Growth in EngineeringEducation Research” depicted in Figure 1. These steps were designed to strengthen the author’scapacity to carry out fundamental engineering education research (EER). The proposed strategystarts with Step 1: Knowledge Building. The knowledge building step outlined opportunities togain knowledge through both formal and informal learning opportunities. As an
disciplinary engagement [13, 14].The goals of this NSF Research Initiation in Engineering Formation (PFE: RIEF) project are to: 1. Build on preliminary work to develop the Virtual Jar Test Laboratory for Water Treatment and develop a corresponding Physical Jar Test Laboratory for Water Treatment. 2. Compare student engagement and demonstration of epistemic practices in the virtual laboratory and physical laboratory modes to develop transferable knowledge about the development of epistemic practices in the laboratory. 3. Develop capacity in PI Nason as an engineering education researcher through a deliberate mentoring plan and research activities.To accomplish these objectives, we are conducting a microgenetic analysis of
point where we can attempt an answer to the last research question of ourproject which is a question measuring the long-term impacts of computational thinking skilldevelopment. Such a question requires a longitudinal approach that our IRB offices haveapproved.Finally, during our project, we came to the realization that our recruiting mechanism – self-selection – limited our participants by demographic categories, and thus our results seemedincomplete. We have initiated steps towards expanding our research to the DFW audience. Whilewe seek IRB approval to include this audience in this final stage of the project, we have analyzedthe cohort from which we did gain access to their grades (n=296). We plan to interviewindividuals who have struggled
customers and coworkers, providing thoughtful, courteous, and knowledgeable service. 10. Teamwork: Assumes shared responsibility for collaborative work and respects the thoughts, opinions, and contributions of other team members. Professional competencies 11. “Big picture” Thinking: Understands one's role in fulfilling the mission of the workplace and considers the social, economic, and environmental impacts of one's actions. 12. Career and Life Management: Plans, implements, and manages
other engineering departments in CECS. For the second time around,faculty members from each engineering department were trained on the bootcamp activities, andhow to conduct the weekly program.Proposed ApproachThe FYIE participants will be taking two courses simultaneously: Introduction to Engineering(Course A) and Learning Frameworks (Course B). These selected courses are focused on assortedtopics and include project elements of technical innovation (MECE 1101) and career path planning(UNIV 1301). As such, the Challenge Based Instruction (CBI) approach was selected as thepedagogical method for these courses (Figure 1) [2], [5], [9]. In this regard, CBI is focused onstudent engagement when properly implemented. Figure 1