expectations of any would-be employer across all sectors,including academic employers. While graduate students entered the program with STEMresearch experience, they acknowledge low levels of career knowledge and career readiness.Building a team of supporters is a feature of career design and embedded throughout this project.CAR 551 promotes a design thinking mindset while supporting participants in exploration ofoptions, forming networks according to interests and skills, and constant revision. Yet, careerdesign principles have the potential to disrupt well- established comfort zones in students aboutthe use of STEM skills.Project organizers created an end-of-semester celebration/reflection to normalize career designand encourage participants to
understanding; and backward design. Culturalrelevance emphasizes the need to understand students’ linguistic, geographic, gender, racial, andgenerational, among other cultural, knowledge as assets that can be leveraged for curriculum andteaching [3]. Concept-based understanding prioritizes inquiry-based learning and application andtransferability of knowledge versus rote memorization of information or discrete skillacquisition. Backwards design provides an accessible structure for planning assessment andlearning activities in ways that center conceptual understanding and student inquiry [4]. Teacherskept reflective journals, analyzed science and mathematics state standards frameworks, and*1 This work was supported by the National Science Foundation
Paper ID #43067Board 240: Developing Critically Conscious Aerospace Engineers throughMacroethics Curricula: Year 1Dr. Aaron W. Johnson, University of Michigan Aaron W. Johnson (he/him) is an Assistant Professor in the Aerospace Engineering Department and a Core Faculty member of the Engineering Education Research Program at the University of Michigan. His lab’s design-based research focuses on how to re-contextualize engineering science engineering courses to better reflect and prepare students for the reality of ill-defined, sociotechnical engineering practice. Their current projects include studying and designing
mathematics) knowledge and skills that educated graduates possess are vital to a significant21 part of the US workforce and contribute to the national economic competitiveness and22 innovation [1]. A study made by Livinstone and Bovil [2] found that American students23 are digital-centered, tend to learn visually and socially, and enjoy interaction and24 connectivity with others and expect to learn in the virtual context. AFL (Active Flipped25 Learning) is a customer-tailored design attempting to take students’ characteristics into26 account, reflecting the embodiment of active learning so that STEM students were27 immensely motivated to reflect, evaluate, create, and make connections between ideas28 [3][4]. The positive influence of
perspectives within theengineering profession. Participant demographics are summarized in Table 1. Thirteen (13)early-career engineers, comprising 9 males and 4 females, volunteered to participate in thisstudy. The participants were within the specified experience range of 0-10 years, with apredominant majority having between 0-5 years of professional experience. The interviewsconducted delved into their experiences, reflections, thoughts, and perceptions concerning ethics,equity, and inclusion in their professional practices as early-career engineers, providing valuableinsights into the challenges and opportunities in the engineering field. The data sources includedonline pre-interview surveys and interviews. These interviews were conducted in an
reflected on their engagement in research oracademic activities during the semester, shared plans for the upcoming semester, and reported anysupport needed from the department. Additionally, surveys assessing various factors such asparticipants’ STEM identity, sense of belonging, and intention to complete CS were administeredto gather comprehensive insights into the program’s impact.ResultsThe results indicate that the scholars benefited from continuous support and a diverse range oflearning, teaching, and research opportunities. Activities provided enhanced scholars’ overallcollege experiences, contributing to their pursuit of studying CS. In this section, we demonstratedthe program’s impact using three key criteria: retention rate, survey
duringchange processes, these differences are often implicit and unexamined. Our project willmake these differences a visible component of critical reflection and generative dialogue,in service to both educational research and practice, and aligned with capacity building forcritical awareness and action.As our project is only in its first of five years and focuses on individual capacity building anddepartment culture transformation, we currently have limited qualitative and quantitativeresults to report. Therefore, this paper focuses primarily on our project’s motivation,proposed scope of work, and early research steps. This paper also discusses our model forchange, Critical Collaborative Educational Change, which is an iterative reinforcing
received her doctorate in Social and Personality Psychology from the University of Washington, with a minor in quantitative methods and emphases in cognitiveDr. Jennifer A Turns, University of Washington Dr. Jennifer Turns is a full professor in the Human Centered Design & Engineering Department in the College of Engineering at the University of Washington. Engineering education is her primary area of scholarship, and has been throughout her career. In her work, she currently focuses on the role of reflection in engineering student learning and the relationship of research and practice in engineering education. In recent years, she has been the co-director of the Consortium to Promote Reflection in Engineering
porous media and leads the graduate track in Hydrologic, Environmental, and Sustainability Engineering (HESE). ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 Building Community for Inclusive Teaching: Can We Bridge the Valley of Neglect?AbstractThis work describes an effort to nudge engineering faculty toward adopting known best practicesfor inclusive teaching through a program called Engineering is Not Neutral: TransformingInstruction via Collaboration and Engagement Faculty (ENNTICE). This monthly facultylearning community (FLC) followed the three-year structure of the Colorado Equity Toolkit:Year 1 (reported in 2022) focused on self-inquiry including reflection
developed programs to help high school students transition into engineering disciplines. Her experience extends to the classroom, where she has served as an Adjunct Faculty member and Technology Education Instructor, mentoring young computer scientists and engineers. These roles have allowed her to directly influence the next generation of engineers, where she emphasized the importance of inclusivity in education. Nicole aspires to influence engineering education policy and establish a consortium that prepares researchers to tackle the challenges of equity in engineering education. Her goal is to help create an academic environment where diversity is not just accepted but celebrated, reflecting the true demographic
is housed. The current study focused on efforts to recruit S-STEM scholarsover two recruitment cycles.To better understand current recruitment efforts, institutional partners and current S-STEMscholars responded to reflection prompts about their experience with recruitment. The sampleincluded all institutional partners and 13 out of 14 scholars. The authors analyzed the writtenreflections using thematic content analysis with most findings relating to (1) factors in awarenessand decision making, (2) reasons for applying, (3) hesitancies and potential barriers and (4)future opportunities and communication strategies. The study revealed that staff perspectivesregarding what worked for students did not necessarily align with student perspectives
-contextualize engineering science engineering courses to better reflect and prepare students for the reality of ill-defined, sociotechnical engineering practice. Their current projects include studying and designing classroom interventions around macroethical issues in aerospace engineering and the productive beginnings of engineering judgment as students create and use mathematical models. Aaron holds a B.S. in Aerospace Engineering from U-M, and a Ph.D. in Aeronautics and Astronautics from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Prior to re-joining U-M, he was an instructor in Aerospace Engineering Sciences at the University of Colorado Boulder.Prof. Rachel Vitali, The University of Iowa Dr. Rachel Vitali is an
scientific phenomena [28-29]. The effectiveness of writing-based interventions to learn domain specific content hasbeen documented across scientific fields including, but not limited to: biology, chemistry,ecology, and physics [29-37]. These and other studies have shown that writing-based STEMinterventions can improve students’ reasoning and conceptual understanding [33, 38-41] and thatwriting becomes even more effective when it includes formative feedback and reflection (p. 84,[42]). For example, a meta-analysis by Bangert-Drowns et al. [43] across 47 studies consideredthe effects of writing-to-learn with feedback compared to writing with no feedback. Feedbackwas more effective than no feedback for academic achievement, with an effect size
into STEMfields through the cultivation of their mentor support networks. Rising Scholars students wereprovided with a scholarship and had a defined path of activities in college designed to enhancetheir professional mentoring network. They were prearranged to participate in a pre-freshmanacademic bootcamp, an on-going faculty-directed research project, a self-directed researchproject, and an internship. Students attended seminars and produced written reflections of theirvarious individual experiences on the path to a professional career. Three cadres of 21 studentstotal, who had expressed a previous interest in engineering, were admitted to a general studiesprogram and provided intensive guidance and an active social group. The Rising
concept of global competence aligns with the University of Dayton's (UD)institutional definition of intercultural competence. According to UD, intercultural competenceinvolves the process of listening, learning, and reflecting to develop knowledge, skills, attitudes,and commitments for engaging across diverse groups in open, effective, and socially responsibleways. The project adheres to the three student learning outcomes outlined in the UDInternational and Intercultural Leadership Certificate, focusing on students' ability to: 1. Explain how issues of social justice, power and privilege are shaped in a variety of contexts. 2. Use language and knowledge of other cultures effectively and appropriately to communicate, connect and
content was covered in isolation from the engineeringprojects with one week of equitable and inclusive STEM environment content followed by aweek of technical experiences with the project-based engineering curriculum. In each subsequentyear, the leadership team adjusted the content planning to better reflect the need for equity workto be embedded in STEM pedagogy, and not as something separate. The most consistentcomponent of the CISTEME365 professional development model was the Action Research forEquity Project (AREP). Participants designed, implemented, and then presented their findingsfrom an action research project where they investigated the impact of implementing one or moretargeted equity and inclusion strategies in their STEM Clubs or
Professional Framework (IPF) [1]. During the 2023 summer, the team also participatedin the Aspire Summer Institute (ASI), sponsored by the NSF Eddie Bernice Johnson INCLUDESAspire Alliance to start developing the content for sessions in inclusive communication. The ASIwas a week-long virtual workshop that gave the team an opportunity to retreat, reflect and act tobetter support the Project ELEVATE professional development pillar. Through the ASPIREsummer institute, the team developed the following long-term goal: “Implement inclusive professional development that equips all engineering faculty and institutional leaders with skills to implement inclusive practices and to support career advancement of faculty from AGEP populations
contested traditionalgrammatical norms to align our language with our emphasis on diversity and inclusion.Specifically, we have preferred the term “neurodiverse” over “neurodivergent” to emphasizediversity rather than deviation from a norm, despite debates over grammatical correctness. Ourlinguistic choices have evolved in response to the rising prominence of “neurodivergence” andour engagement with the peer review process, which plays a crucial role in normalizing languagewithin the academic community. Through this discussion, we aim to clarify our stance onneurodiversity language, reflecting on its implications for higher education and research.The Neurodiversity vs. Neurodivergent Dilemma: Challenging the Concept of NormalThe introduction of the
preparation includes practice with thecurriculum and Pods including troubleshooting skills necessary for non-commercial laboratoryequipment (2b and 2c in Figure 1).During the spring semester, high school projects begin with a week-long launch in high schoolclassrooms. Mentors receive logistical support to complete their monthly trips. Mentors alsoengage in weekly teaching reflections in a variety of forms [11] and receive instructor and peerfeedback (2d in Figure 1).Component 3 is focused on the adaptation and integration of the Pod platforms and is the rightbox in Figure 1. To support the implementation of high school student environmental monitoringprojects, Pods include a flexible multi-sensor package for gathering a variety of environmentaldata
toengage students in the practices of front-end design [4] supporting students throughout each lesson todevelop a strong understanding of stakeholder need while exploring the ill-structured, real-world issue ofwater conservation. Another central purpose of the curriculum was to help students draw connectionsbetween and leverage science, engineering, and social or community knowledge. The curriculumsupported students to explore this problem locally, understanding water conservation issues andchallenges in their own communities, to allow students to leverage funds of knowledge [12], [13] andtheir local expertise as they engaged in the process of front-end design. The summative assessment at theend of our series of lessons is an extended reflection
community workshop where members shareaccess to tools in order to produce physical goods” [5]. In a recent literature review, Mersanddefined a makerspace as “an area that provides materials and tools to encourage individuals orgroups to make things, to create new knowledge, or to solve problems” [6]. In educationalcontexts, makerspaces should provide access to defining elements of the Maker movement,including digital tools, community infrastructure, and “the maker mindset,” involving a positiveview of failure and focus on collaboration [7].While these definitions do not mention gender or race, they may reflect a bias of the predominantusers of makerspaces [8], as makerspaces have, at times, struggled to adequately serve a broadcommunity [9]. Rather
as reflected in ENGR350 projects; and (3) promotion of diversity inthe regional technology workforce.4. Second Year ResultsRecruitment, Retention, and DemographicsThe program began the [inaugural] 2022-23 academic year with ten scholars enrolled. Onescholar left the program after the fall 2022 semester due to academic difficulties. Two scholarsleft the program after the spring 2023 semester to attend other institutions. The program retainedseven students to begin the 2023-24 academic year. As shown in Table 2, the program has acapacity of twenty-four participants in the second year. Thus, recruiting for fall 2023 aimed tofill seventeen available seats.The recruiting campaign began with an email solicitation to students who had been accepted
for all students.Within the context of this project, the course redesign process is guided by a set of faculty-created standards for neuroinclusive teaching, known within the project as I-Standards; thesestandards have undergone multiple iterations to reflect the team’s understanding of current bestpractices. The standards were developed along with experts from the university’s Center forExcellence in Teaching and Learning and the School of Education. Anchored in a strengths-based approach to neurodiversity, the standards focus on three main areas: 1) building a cultureof inclusion, 2) instructional design and inclusive teaching practices, and 3) enhancingcommunication and supports for students [41]. The teaching and learning standards are
theclosing of the university campus and makerspace. When classes resumed in-person, themakerspace did not return to pre-pandemic student usage levels. As a result of this down-time inworking with students, both students and university staff had the opportunity to re-designsystems, including hiring. This forced pause and reflection, while not ideal, was an importantlesson learned to remind staff to re-evaluate existing systems. This shift resulted in a staff thatwas close to pre-pandemic gender parity levels at the time of interviews in 2022. One female-identifying student staff member described the this as “a good thing, In engineering, I have faceddiscrimination, of course, just being one of the minority women. I know in petroleumengineering, we're
reached.IDP module has been modified significantly over the last several years based on feedback fromearly participants and our own growth in understanding student’s needs and challenges innavigating an interdisciplinary program. In the early offerings of the course, we introduced whatan IDP is, why it is important and how to use it to assess progress and plan for the future.Students fill an IDP template with help and feedback from the course instructor (and sometimestheir research advisors). Student feedback and reflections showed that students struggled withthe IDP exercise.The current implementation of the course spends three to four lectures that building up themotivation for IDP development. The first lecture gives an overall view of the
similardistricts.To accomplish the goal of including emergent bilingual students in engineering activities, we areemploying a design-based research approach with a participatory framework [3] to design,implement, and investigate a standards-aligned professional learning model for monolingualteachers. School leaders, principals, and teachers are working with the research team to co-construct and iterate a model of professional learning. This model introduces teaching toengineering design along with translanguaging (i.e., using all the linguistic resources in anylanguage that a student brings to the classroom within their engineering work). Our model alsoasks teachers to reflect on their language ideologies, or beliefs and conceptions of how languageis used in
research broadly focused on global issues related to sustainable waste management and plastic pollution. After earning her PhD 2021 from the University of Georgia, Amy developed skills in qualitative research methods in engineering education at Oregon State University. As part of this training, she used interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) to examine engineering faculty well-being and collaborated on the development of a reflective tool for researchers to build skills in semi- and unstructured interviewing. Building on her postdoctoral training, Amy aims to merge her methodological interests to pursue research questions in the nexus of engineering education, sustainable development, and resilient
reflects the learning process [13], [14], [15]. Although the potential for STEMand music integration has long been recognized, the idea has been slow to become popular withmainstream audiences, such as school children in their classrooms. A previous experience by thisteam, supported by the National Science Foundation’s grant “Connecting STEM to Music andthe Physics of Sound Waves”, developed and implemented a set of activities geared towardsengaging underserved children in STEM through the connections with music. In it, members ofthis team visited 8th-grade classrooms and worked together with teachers, helping childrenexplore how physical objects and digital tools vibrate and create sound. The experience provedto greatly improve the children’s
indicate consistent use of digital Engineering Design ID Materials Process Log (EDPL) during implementation of 8th grade curricula, as suggested. Several teachers also observed using the EDPL with 6th and/or 7th grade classes as well. Teacher Interviews document teacher reflections on which stages of the EDP they Facilitation/Student found most challenging to facilitate. Challenges related to the Ideate and Engagement in Evaluate stages were most common. For example, Teacher 1 described Engineering Design students’ reluctance ideate and the challenge of facilitating iteration: Process “The biggest thing that they struggled with is the ideate
examining conceptual knowledge gains, affect, identity development, engineering judgment, and problem solving.Dr. Aaron W. Johnson, University of Michigan Aaron W. Johnson (he/him) is an Assistant Professor in the Aerospace Engineering Department and a Core Faculty member of the Engineering Education Research Program at the University of Michigan. His lab’s design-based research focuses on how to re-contextualize engineering science engineering courses to better reflect and prepare students for the reality of ill-defined, sociotechnical engineering practice. Their current projects include studying and designing classroom interventions around macroethical issues in aerospace engineering and the productive beginnings of