experiences ofgraduate students, these studies less often distinguish between domestic and internationalstudents. International students experience additional unique challenges that further affect theirgraduate school experiences in comparison to their domestic peers [18]. Some of thesechallenges include differences in institutional culture leading to lower language, writing, andleadership self-efficacy, geographical separation and reduced social support from family andfriends, language barriers, and adjustment to climatic, cultural, and social differences [6], [7].These unique challenges result in isolation, disconnectedness, and lower self-confidence amonginternational students [6].However, studies examining peer mentorship programs designed to
significance level of 95 % confidence level to determine descriptive and inferentialstatistics. At the same time, thematic analysis was utilized for the qualitative data to reveal periodicthemes and distinctive strategies used by the participants. Results showed that participantsstruggled with writing methodology, logically integrating information, and articulating their ideaseffectively. Despite these challenges, they implemented various adaptive techniques, includingreviewing prior literature, utilizing online platforms like ResearchGate and YouTube, workingwith peers and mentors, enrolling in formal writing courses, and employing AI tools to enhancegrammar and structure. External motivation, such as awards and prizes, and maintaining supportivework
writer identity is also supported when students canengage in the practice of writing and speaking outside of the idealized space of the classroom[7], and in contexts and situations where they can discuss effective strategies and challenges withpeers and mentors whose experiences mirror their own [18]. These spaces allow students to formcommunities of practice [11] where they can draw from and build on peer support [2] as theynavigate disciplinary conventions and communication requirements for the dissertation [18],proposals [4], conference presentations, journal articles, course papers, and other genresassociated with the professional practice of academic engineering researchers.Further, research informed by academic literacies theories suggests
) appraising the original scale, (3) understanding the context of graduatestudent communication, (4) adapting and developing items, (5) aligning items with SDT andgraduate student experiences, (6) validating content and testing usability, and (7) preparing thetool for deployment. These steps ensured that the COMM-FLOWS tool remained boththeoretically grounded and practically relevant for assessing how engineering graduate studentsnavigate advisor-student and peer-peer interactions, scholarly writing, and professionalpresentations.This study makes two novel contributions to graduate engineering education. First, it introducesa decision-aid approach to communication assessment by transforming COMM-FLOWS from astatic diagnostic instrument into an active
Engineering was helping students to develop these skills for theirresearch thesis, as well as their career success within and outside academia. Through a survey ofChemical Engineering graduate alumni, meetings with graduate supervisors, and focus groupswith current graduate students we learnt that research skill training was not equitable:respondents reported that training was highly variable, supervisor dependent, and typicallydelivered via peer mentorship from senior graduate students. While the value of peer-to-peerlearning is reflected in the literature and is central to our course pedagogy [9], students wereconcerned about consistent quality and authority without commensurate engagement fromfaculty. Graduate students described seeking
Education, 2025 The Process of Applying to Graduate School as an Undergraduate: A Scoping Literature ReviewAbstractAs engineering graduate programs increasingly adopt holistic admissions strategies to fosterdiversity and equity, understanding the nuanced experiences of applicants and the evaluationpriorities of admissions committees becomes critical. This scoping literature review (ScLR)explores research published since 2000 to examine how the admissions and application processesfor engineering graduate school are structured, perceived, and evaluated. Through a systematicsearch across multiple databases, 16 peer-reviewed publications were selected and thematicallyanalyzed into three domains: admissions process
, in which we haveexperimented and refined the process through which we train our students to develop, refine andupdate their IDPs. Over the five years of the grant we have continually adapted and iterativelymodified the IDP course assignments based on students’ feedback and course reflections. Thispaper discusses the evolution and implementation of our updated IDP process, that includes pre-IDP activities aimed at envisioning a future self, discussions of program timelines andmilestones, the hidden curricula and challenges with recent alumni, career exploration activitiesto inform the IDP, seminar and panel discussions on the pathways and challenges tointerdisciplinary careers, developing a network of mentors, near peer advising by students a
overlooked. This imbalancein STEM education can impact graduate students’ preparedness for various career paths in bothacademia and industry. GAPS course design combines active learning and inductive teachingmethods, enabling students to apply professional skills directly to their thesis research throughcommunity-based experiential learning. In-class discussions, online forums, and peer feedbackalso facilitate collaborative problem-solving and reflective engagement.In this study, GAPS was used to evaluate the effectiveness of these pedagogical approaches. Thestudy aimed to understand how these strategies lead to the development of essential professionalskills among STEM graduate students by examining the incorporation of active learning andinductive
, the Center developed ForwardFellows (FF), a funded, extended onboarding program, longer than a typical departmentalonboarding or orientation, designed to help new students develop self-efficacy in research, asense of belonging at the university, and a community of peers from multiple STEM disciplines.The FF program targets incoming STEM graduate students who would benefit from additionalonboarding (e.g. students from historically underrepresented groups, first generation students,students returning to academia after time in industry, etc.). We also intend FF to serve as anincentive to attract potential graduate students and, in the long term, to help retain studentsthrough the completion of their graduate degrees. Due to the type of funding
provide not only direction for futureinterventions, but a tool to assess the impact of ongoing and future interventions. This can aid toincrease the retention of engineering graduate students and their successful degree completion byproviding key areas of focus to support positive mental health experiences.IntroductionInstitutions of higher education have been struggling for over a decade to meet students’ mentalhealth needs admits a growing national mental health crisis [1]. Mental health problems areconsistently among the top cited reasons for students’ leaving their degree program. Graduatestudents specifically are known to be more likely to have or develop a mental health problemcompared to same age, highly-educated peers [2-3]. In addition
perspectives students bring to such programs, we can assess the degree to whichdisciplinary background shapes their approach to teaching and determine whether a generalizedprogram can still align with their values and experiences.Data were collected from 68 students in a graduate-level capstone teaching course providedthrough the Center for Teaching and Learning at a large, public, research-intensive institution inthe southeastern United States. Of these students, 37 were in the College of Engineering, while31 were from other disciplines. Students participated in a semester-long mentored teachingexperience and completed the TPI around Week 3 of the semester. They were asked to write areflection on their scores and develop teaching philosophy
of ecological systems [26], Mondisa and colleaguesdeveloped a STEM Mentoring Ecosystem framework [13] to better understand what causes mentorsand mentees to use some resources, what patterns of mentoring exchanges are productive, and whatstructures cultivate mentoring interactions. According to the model, there are several interacting systems within mentoring in STEM[13]. Microsystems provide the most direct person-to-person encounters and for graduate students,these interpersonal or intragroup interactions can include peers, faculty, staff, and family.Mesosystems include the intergroup interactions between microsystems such as departments,colleges, or schools that serve to support or create conflict with each entity. Ecosystems
strategies. Content knowledge for theclass(es) being taught can also be an important component of competence but it is not one weinvestigated. All the GTAs in this study were teaching introductory-level physics, math, and CS sowe assumed that they had sufficient knowledge and understanding of the subject content.Recognition in this model is the acknowledgment of a GTA’s teaching efforts by students, faculty,or peers. This recognition by others can significantly impact GTAs’ confidence and motivation.Positive feedback and validation reinforce GTA identity as effective educators, while well-delivered constructive criticism promotes growth by encouraging reflection and refinement ofteaching methods [11]. As Carless [12] highlights, clear and
interactive approaches learned at the Stanfordd.school’s Teaching & Learning Studio. The stated learning objectives of the bootcamp are: ● Ability to formulate and test non-scientific hypotheses ● Ability to identify the broader impact of your research work ● Ability to apply these methods to grant writing, job search, and career development ● Develop an understanding of the NSF I-Corps program principlesAdditional objectives include networking skills development, personal reflection and actionplanning, and community building. The bootcamp is typically delivered in 3 half-day sessionsover a 3-day period, although a 2-day version has also been piloted. The advantage of holdingthe bootcamp over 3-days is that it provides additional time
conductingresearch, writing grants to secure external funding, and managing a research team [11], [12].Advice on more concrete aspects of successfully applying to faculty positions, such as preparingan application package, interviewing, and negotiating an offer, are more commonly reported astaught during professional development events (e.g., future faculty workshops), though these areoften aimed at students and postdocs from groups historically excluded in engineering [19]. Although there has been research on the frequency and satisfaction of PhD studentsreceiving career advice from their advisors, less is known about what types of advice is given.This study seeks to fill that gap.2.2 | Framework: Leader-Member Exchange Theory In an academic
engagedin a workshop hosted by the EERC to develop detailed learning objectives for their courses based onBloom's revised taxonomy [12]. Faculty were informed on how learning objectives were integral to theproject and the importance of writing them to cover the depth of learning for both assessment andindustry use. Faculty were then instructed on Bloom’s revised taxonomy and provided step-by-stepinstructions for writing clear objectives, practice examples, and in-workshop time to revise specific courselearning objectives. The exercise yielded 96 learning objectives across the six topics. Each outcome waslabeled so that SMEs could identify which course it belonged to (e.g., Transport: Split PDEs into two ormore ODEs and solve them via separation of
receive. For some graduate students, this question wasreflected in their need to learn how to identify, evaluate, and navigate potential sources offeedback. The NRT FORW-RD program’s emphasis on applied ethics and broader impacts ofresearch played a significant role in spotlighting a world of ‘feedback’ that exists outside of theone inhabited by academic advisors and peers: The program has been helping people shift their mindset, look at other perspectives through things like the ethics class [and] the workshops. [It is an] undercurrent [and it] ends up sinking in even though it wasn't the main thing. [We now ask:] “who are the collaborators you think can help you on your project?” [This does not have to be] directly
ongoing formation of their researcher identities.GRG Workforce Development ContextWithin the GRG, IBM theory underpins the workforce development plan and is a normal part ofhow all outreach and professional development activities for graduate students are structured. Theconcept of Action Readiness within IBM theory highlights how students in the GRG areencouraged to engage in interdisciplinary research that helps develop their personal and careergoals. Dynamic Construction is also highlighted, as students are encouraged to take the lead onprojects, transitioning from participants to leaders in their research. Additionally, they are guidedon projects through mentor feedback and peer collaboration through weekly meetings, fostering asupportive
Engineering at the Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI). He received his BS in 2007 from WPI and his PhD in 2013 from Stanford University. He has co-authored over 50 peer-reviewed articles that have appeared in Advanced Energy Materials, Nano Letters, Flexible and Printed Electronics, and other journals, and have collectively been cited over 4,000 times. His work on printed flexible and stretchable electronics has been funded by the U.S. Department of Defense through the NextFlex Manufacturing USA Institute and the SEMI-FlexTech program; and by the Commonwealth of MA through the Massachusetts Manufacturing Innovation Initiative. His work on photo-catalytic materials for water treatment and clean hydrogen production
virtualplatforms disrupted these critical elements, significantly impacting both academic progress andpractical training. The shift to online learning, unplanned due to the pandemic, created widespreadchallenges for faculty, staff, and students to adapt to the "new normal." Additionally, research by(Moran et al., 2023; Paul et al., 2023) highlighted equity and access issues in virtual settings,emphasizing the urgent need to address these concerns amidst such abrupt changes. The mentalhealth impacts of the pandemic on graduate students have been significant. Isolation from peers andmentors, coupled with uncertainties surrounding academic progress and job prospects, increasedstress, anxiety, and other mental health issues (Zaniyah et al., 2021).Before the
been a faculty member since 2000. He received his Ph.D. in Physics from the University of Utah in 1992 and a Habilitation in Experimental Physics from University of Paderborn, Germany in 2000. Dr. Dierolf’s research focuses on the study of novel electronic and optical materials, with a particular emphasis on rare earth dopants in semiconductors and laser produced single crystals in glass. He has authored or co-authored over 200 publications in peer-reviewed journals, and has been awarded several patents for his work.Dr. Anand Jagota, Lehigh University Anand Jagota is Vice Provost for Research and the Robert W. Wieseman Professor of Bioengineering and of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering at Lehigh University. His