engineering are part of a research group, typicallya team of peers working under the supervision of the same faculty member. These groups arecentered around a specific research focus and provide space for collaborative learning. They caninfluence how students approach their research, acquire knowledge, develop skills, and feelabout being part of a broader academic or professional community [8].Despite their importance, the role of research groups on a graduate student’s experience has notbeen studied as extensively as the role of the supervisor. Yet, existing research highlights theirunique contributions. For example, Pyhältö et al. found that while supervisors tend to provideindividual mentorship, research groups foster teamwork and intellectual
students to illustrate a concept from waterchemistry. Details of the project have been published; see [10]. At the beginning of the semester,students were randomly grouped into teams of 4-5 (in one case a student dropped the courseresulting in a team of 3 students). Teams and/or individuals were assigned to write shortReflective Memos (RMs) throughout the semester in order to scaffold their learning throughtypes of innovative behaviors and cognitive skills (under Dyer’s innovator’s model [2-3]). Asdepicted in Table 1 below, two RMs were given as individual assignments (RM2 Observing andRM4 Networking), and three were assigned to be completed as a team (RM1 Questioning, RM3Experimenting, RM5 Associational Thinking).Table 1- Reflective Memo (RM
, cohort members actively apply the training in phase one by redesigning one oftheir courses. Each faculty incorporates the principles, strategies, and practices learned to thecontext of one of their courses, and then during the academic year directly following phase one,faculty teach the redesigned version of their course, directly practicing their new knowledge andskills is a real-world teaching context. Throughout this phase, faculty receive ongoing supportthrough both the instructor of the program as well as peer collaboration through the cohort. Weensure that all cohort members have the tools and resources needed to successfully integrateinclusive teaching practices into their course.We launched our first cohort in spring 2024, successfully
teachingundergraduate courses at the research sites formed the potential participant pool. They wereemailed explaining the purpose of the study and inviting them to participate. All who expressedinterest in participating were recruited. IRB approval was obtained before emailing theparticipants. Data were collected in the form of semi-structured interviews. The interview protocolprobed the participants to reflect on the mathematical concepts used in the engineering coursestaught by them, the readiness of students to apply these concepts, and how they respond tostudents’ math readiness. They were also asked for general recommendations on improvingstudents’ math readiness. These interviews were conducted by the first author. As of writing thispaper, we have
seen that this conflict could lead to the application of methods in ways that activelyworked against company interests. One example of this was seen in an application of TechnologyReadiness Levels (TRL) [19] for product development. I think the downside of it had been, it created a metric, right, for people. Everyone would write in their performance review, “Oh, I'll get from TRL whatever to whatever," and then I think that led to kind of falsely progressing things to the next level. But then also, it created a little bit of a dysfunctional motivation in that actually, in the front end, sometimes you shouldn't progress it, sometimes you should kill it. Right? You should end it and move on to the next
include Sustainable Energy, Green Manufacturing, Quality Control, and Multi Objective Decision Making and Optimization as well as Engineering EducaMohammad Motaher Hossain, Texas A&M University - Kingsville Mohammad Motaher Hossain is an Associate Professor in the Department of Mechanical & Industrial Engineering at Texas A&M University-Kingsville. His research mainly focuses on structure-property relationship in polymers, surface engineering, polymer tribology, contact mechanics, and fracture and failure analysis of polymeric materials. He received his Doctorate degree in Mechanical Engineering from Texas A&M University. Dr. Hossain is a frequent peer reviewer for a number of journals and served as a
science good at math and science12. In order to be at good engineering, I have 2.4 10. In order to be at good engineering, I have to be 2.5to be good at art and design good at art and design13. In the space below, write individual words Word 11. In the space below, write individual words (as Word(as many as you like) that, to you, describes a many as you like) that, to you, describes a computercomputer scientist scientistReviewing Table 1, first we can see in the pre-survey (questions 8-10) that campers werebetween “Agree” and “Neutral” when it came to identifying mentors and role models incomputing or engineering. Question 10 on a family
Bay. The mapping component is parttwo of a five-part scaffolded research project that embeds reading, research, and writing skills.During the next several weeks, the history portion of the HMP is dedicated to locating primaryand secondary sources and workshopping those sources. The history instructor works one-on-onewith students to vet sources online, annotating the sources with notes on why, when, and forwhom the source was created. The goal of the research component is for students to practicelocating sources that situate regional topics in their historical context. Sifting through sourcesalso helps students to narrow things down and revise their questions. The practice of knowinghow to ask a good historical question is the first part of
framework was usedas an example of the processes of capacity development, and the other as an example of itsoutcomes.The example framework for the process of capacity development was Pact’s framework [16],[17]. Pact’s definition of capacity development is: “a continuous process that fosters the abilitiesand agency of individuals, institutions, and communities to overcome challenges and contributetowards local solutions... Though often developed in response to an immediate and specificissue, capacities are adaptable to future opportunities and challenges.” According to Pact, thefollowing activities can be used to build participants’ capacity: consultancy services, training,mentoring/coaching, information/resources, and peer exchange and learning.The
beliefs that children must be fully proficient in Englishbefore they can participate in intellectually challenging STEM activities and learning. As aresult, students classified as emergent bilinguals are often placed in tracks with low-level contentand low expectations [2], [3], [4], [5]. This leads to fewer opportunities to participate in math,science, or engineering lessons, thus exacerbating the inequities between multilingual studentsand their monolingual English peers [6], [7]. This deficit mindset is detrimental to the learningopportunities of these students. In contrast, asset-based pedagogies (such as translanguaging) formultilingual students are engaging, effective, and often benefit every student in a classroom.In seeking to introduce
career [11]. Research indicates that school-day opportunities for algebraremediation had a detrimental impact on higher-ability peers who would otherwise be advancingonto new skills [12]. Moreover, budding literature on the effectiveness of online programs pre-pandemic [13] indicated an innovative avenue for research and program development. Thus, theoriginal conceptualization of BOAST in 2019 was as an asynchronous, fully online afterschoolprogram. Instead of more math, the program developers aimed for contextualized math through analgebra-for-engineering, problem-based model. Culturally relevant teaching [14] is demonstratedto impact STEM self-efficacy, STEM identity, and STEM career aspirations [13], [15]. Applyingmath skills to
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
Wisconsin, Milwaukee. Papadopoulos has diverse interests in structural mechanics, sustainable construction materials (with emphasis in bamboo), engineering ethics, and engineering education. He is co-author of Lying by Approximation: The Truth about Finite Element Analysis, and after many years, he has finally (maybe) learned how to teach Statics, using an experiential and peer-based learning ”studio” model. As part of the UPRM Sustainability Engineering initiative to develop a new bachelor’s degree and curricular sequence, Papadopoulos is PI of A New Paradigm for Sustainability Engineering: A Transdisciplinary, Learner-Centered, and Diversity-Focused Approach, funded by the NSF HSI program. Papadopoulos is active in the
Paper ID #48021Using student-led case studies in engineering to build cultural awareness,self-knowledge, and ethical engagementKelsey McLendon, University of Michigan Kelsey McLendon is a Lecturer in the Program in Technical Communication in the College of Engineering at the University of Michigan. Her research interests are technical writing, social and emotional learning, and DEIJ in engineering education.Dr. Katie Snyder, University of Michigan Dr. Snyder is a lecturer in the Program in Technical Communication at the University of Michigan. She teaches writing and presentation strategies to students in the College of
generally have for lab coursework. Anotherissue students experience is developing a thorough understanding of what the lab is teaching andretaining that knowledge. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the discipline of manufacturingprocesses and the study of material properties in material science.Material properties lie at the heart of many engineering disciplines, as materials are whatengineers incorporate in their disciplines. The study of material properties can be greatlyaccelerated in engineering courses by integrating a hands-on approach to the creation and testingof laboratory experiments through inquiry-based experiential learning. This approach will beachieved by allowing students to create, design, test, and write their own laboratory
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
activities primarily focus on generative assistance, data analysis, computing efficiency,and research writing, GenAI-enhanced teaching encompasses preparing lessons, generatingsyllabi, creating assessments, engaging students, and developing lesson plans. Furthermore, theethical and safe use of GenAI must be considered, particularly in addressing issues such asmisinformation, bias, hallucinations, and privacy risks [6], [7], [8]. The emergence of GenAI necessitates a change throughout higher education [9], withfaculty playing an integral role in ensuring its success [10]. As key drivers of this transformation,faculty must proactively respond to the rise of GenAI, even before institutions formalize policiesand processes to guide its integration
of online integration platforms such as Wolfram’s Mathematica© intheir own times caused charged discussions in faculty lounges and curriculum developmentcommittees [3], [4]. This tension is healthy and for the most part has led to a balanced,satisfactory product appropriate for its time.Measured change to curricula is further tempered by external organizations that help engineeringdepartments benchmark each curriculum with other peer institutions and against recent feedbackfrom industry. From the highest level, professional licensure and its supporting educationalrequirements anchor engineering curricula. The National Council of Examiners for Engineeringand Surveying’s (NCEES) Fundamentals of Engineering (FE) Exam is the gateway to
additions that we plan to test out in the next implementation are requiringthe students to write a proposal for their learning activity or aid with clear final deliverable goalsat the beginning of the term and then do an in-class presentation or demonstration of theirlearning activity or aid at the end of the term. The proposal could be graded in a way thatprovides students feedback on whether they need to expand or reduce their scope and how to doso while setting clear benchmarks to meet by the middle and end of the term. The presentationcan provide another point of assessment while also providing an additional incentive for thestudents to produce something they are proud to present to their peers. Instructors with largerclass sizes could consider
practices assessment instruments to identify potential instruments that could serve as thefoundation for our EM-infused engineering-specific teaching practices assessment tool. To coverthe landscape of STEM education literature, an education-focused database and amultidisciplinary database focused on STEM education were searched using a combination ofkeywords logically organized with Boolean operators. The initial results from the databasesearches consisted of 158 peer-reviewed publications. After the selection process, 13 papersreporting teaching practices were identified. This literature review study listed the teachingpractice assessment instruments reported in the selected documents and discussed theirapplicability to EM engineering teaching
support autistic students in K-12 education, higher education, and employment. Theauthors stress the need for ongoing efforts to prepare educators, employers, and peers to betterunderstand and support autistic individuals. As a result, this requires developing new pathways toengineering education and opportunities that address both their potential and their specific needs (Ehsanet al., 2019; Kouo et al., 2021). Additionally, the focus of many research articles related to broadening participation for autisticstudents in engineering is often within an article that explores STEM more broadly (Ehsan, 2018;Nachman et al, 2024; Wei et al, 2017) or more broadly addresses students with disabilities (Bellman et al,2018; McCall et al, 2020; Moon
necessitatemultimodal communication such as writing, drawing, and gesturing, and “displaying informationmultimodally supports [MLs’] receptive language” (p. 267). Studies have also proposed effectiveways of teaching engineering to MLs. For example, Lee et al. [6] proposed that MLs benefitfrom engaging with multiple modalities (e.g., visuals, diagrams, and linguistic models). Garlickand Wilson-Lopez [7] recommended using contextualized, relevant, and culturally responsiveengineering challenges.Building on these insights, the present study aims to contribute to the literature by exploring oneteacher’s experience as a teacher of MLs within the context of culturally relevant engineeringeducation in her classroom. The purpose of this study was to understand how
%. This assignmentasked student teams to do some self-directed learning about a particular healthcare disparity oftheir choice and dig deeper into its impact. Additionally, teams were asked to create engagingand informative infographics, which were printed and on display for the entire class to see. Thisshowcase facilitated a great deal of discussion and energy, as well as peer learning.The case study assignment was also quite effective at increasing social justice issues awareness,with 93% of participants rating it as Very or Somewhat Well. Here, students were asked todiscuss healthcare disparities that have affected them or someone they love in small groups,choose one, and write a case study for the rest of the class to read and comment on
improve their ability to ask meaningful questions [12]. It has demonstrated a positive effecton several aspects of education, including learning interest and achievement, knowledgeretention, and explicit reasoning [13]. It is believed that ChatGPT, if implemented correctly, canenhance student creativity and critical thinking [14].On the contrary, the software can also be used to violate academic integrity policies. Itstext-generation capabilities are especially alarming for writing assignments, including researchpapers and dissertations [15]. Indeed, a survey sent to college students in the US found 53% usedChatGPT to write papers and 48% even used it during exams [16].With many policies and decisions being made in higher educational settings, it
University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee. Papadopoulos has diverse interests in structural mechanics, sustainable construction materials (with emphasis in bamboo), engineering ethics, and engineering education. He is co-author of Lying by Approximation: The Truth about Finite Element Analysis, and after many years, he has finally (maybe) learned how to teach Statics, using an experiential and peer-based learning ”studio” model. As part of the UPRM Sustainability Engineering initiative to develop a new bachelor’s degree and curricular sequence, Papadopoulos is PI of A New Paradigm for Sustainability Engineering: A Transdisciplinary, Learner-Centered, and Diversity-Focused Approach, funded by the NSF HSI program, and he is also a
access to academic literature,which they saw as being provided by their lecturers.Where gender was included as a variable, often some attempt was made to look fordifferences between women and men. However, only two papers in this review found anysuch differences. The first was based on self-assessment of information literacy, and foundthat female undergraduates rated themselves as more competent in information literacy thantheir male peers [64]. This contradicted earlier findings from a similar self-assessment studybased on different but comparable IL criteria, which found that women undergraduates ratedthemselves as less competent than male undergraduates [70].The second paper was based on citation analysis of student work [71]. This study
they encounter our choices and those of their peers; and that through thisprocess we hope to inform students how to make their own choices regarding social andtechnological change.IntroductionWe, four engineering educators trained in science and technology studies (STS) and employed atengineering and engineering-adjacent programs, offer in this paper a multi-institutional survey ofpedagogical choices that we have made in the service of sociotechnical integration. Bypedagogical choices we mean an array of decisions in the context of our institutional homes,courses we teach, and student bodies enrolled. We reflect on the commonalities and differencesof introducing sociotechnical material in our disparate contexts, ranging from humanities
that the user will need to understand when interacting with an LLM. Finally, thereare some ethical perspectives discussed that address why there was a focus on using an offlineLLM to perform this study.AI and Higher EducationIn education, AI has been utilized to interpret texts automatically, perform semantic analysis,provide translations, generate texts for learning contents, and support personalization processes[1].A difficult aspect of higher education is providing assignments that require a higher level ofthinking and then providing assessment and feedback to students that is timely, consistent, and ofhigh quality. One of the more useful tools to require higher levels of thinking from students isessay writing [2]. The problem associated
Engineering and Science Education in 2019 and a BS in Electrical Engineering in 2014 at Clemson University.Dr. Darcie Christensen, Minnesota State University, Mankato Dr. Darcie Christensen is a probationary Assistant Professor in the Department of Integrated Engineering at Minnesota State University Mankato. She teaches for Iron Range Engineering on the Mesabi Range College Campus. Dr. Christensen received her Ph.D. in Engineering Education from Utah State University in the Summer of 2021. The title of her Dissertation is ”A Mixed-Method Approach to Explore Student Needs for Peer Mentoring in a College of Engineering.” Darcie holds a Master of Engineering degree in Environmental Engineering (2019) and Bachelor of Science
Generation (RAG) system for research-related inquiries at the University of Arizona. Dr. Hossain has published over two dozen peer-reviewed articles in areas including data science, computer algorithms, graph theory, network visualization, information retrieval, information visualization, machine learning, natural language processing, and database systems. He actively collaborates with external groups, students, and researchers at the University of Arizona on a wide range of research projects. With over 20 years of professional experience in research, IT systems development, team management, and innovation, Dr. Hossain is passionate about designing data science systems and leading efforts to solve the university’s