AC 2012-3490: MULTICULTURAL ENGINEERING RECRUITMENT ANDRETENTION AT A LARGE URBAN UNIVERSITYDr. Katherine S. Zerda, University of Houston Kathy Zerda is the Director of the Program for Mastery in Engineering Studies (PROMES), the multicul- tural learning community for undergraduates at the Cullen College of Engineering. She also directs the UH Women in Engineering program. Zerda is an Instructional and Research Assistant Professor for the college and serves as the faculty adviser for the student chapters of the Society of Women Engineers and the Society of Mexican American Engineers and Scientists. Before joining the University of Houston, Zerda worked as an Engineering Manager for Hewlett-Packard Company. She
interpreter from the Scuola Superiore per Interpreti e Traduttori in Milan, Italy.Dr. Shashi S. Nambisan P.E., Iowa State University Since 2007, Shashi Nambisan has been the Director, Institute for Transportation (InTrans) and a professor of civil engineering at Iowa State University (ISU) in Ames, Iowa. He previously served on the faculty at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, for more than 17 years. He is a registered Professional Engineer in the state of Nevada. One of Nambisan’s passions is the development of the future transportation work- force. He enjoys working with students. His advisees have developed successful professional careers at universities or in the private and public sectors. Many of them serve in
AC 2012-4806: LSAMP INDIANA: LESSONS LEARNED FROM A DIVER-SITY PROGRAM SERVING UNDERREPRESENTED MINORITY STU-DENTSDr. Monica Farmer Cox, Purdue University, West LafayetteMrs. Jeremi S. London, Purdue University, West Lafayette Jeremi London is a graduate student at Purdue University. She is pursuing a M.S. in industrial engineering and a Ph.D. in engineering education.Mr. Benjamin Ahn, Purdue University, West Lafayette Benjamin Ahn is a Ph.D. student in the School of Engineering Education at Purdue University. His research interests relate to higher education reform, graduate teaching assistants’ roles in engineering classes, undergraduate engineering syllabus and curriculum development, and professional engineering
., University of Maryland, Eastern ShoreDr. Terry John Teays, Johns Hopkins UniversityDr. Craig S. T. Daughtry, USDA-ARS Hydrology and Remote Sensing Laboratory Craig S.T. Daughtry is a Research Agronomist at USDA-ARS Hydrology and Remote Sensing Laboratory in Beltsville, Md. He received his Ph.D. in agronomy from Purdue University and is a Fellow of the American Society of Agronomy. He actively collaborates with faculty at UMES on remote sensing and precision agriculture related efforts.Dr. Jurgen G. Schwarz, University of Maryland, Eastern Shore Jurgen G. Schwarz is the Acting Dean of the School of Agricultural and Natural Sciences and 1890 Research Director at the University of Maryland, Eastern Shore. He is also the Director
a bilingual student as one who is taught both in English and/or Spanish, but Spanish istheir primary language. Furthermore, CATS was designed by Dr. Paul Steif to detect errorsassociated with important and difficult statics concepts. The questions in CATS were developedprimarily through the experience of the designer and two Statics professors at differentuniversities and according to 9 difficult concepts.4 Four distractors were created for eachquestion based on students’ written responses to open-ended questions.This paper discusses activities and findings from the first phase of the study, whose objectivewas the creation of a Spanish version of CATS, referred to as CATS-S. The research questionthat guided this phase was as follows: What
that gives a review of electro-magnetics, transmission line theory, s-parameters and two-port network analysis, and impedance matching. The second semester courseoffered in the spring is EEGR 444, Specialized Topics in Microwaves, builds upon EEGR 443and includes topics related to design methodologies on filters and amplifiers. These courses areprerequisites for advanced graduate coursework in RF Microwaves. Prior to 2008, the Department’s microwave courses offered had no laboratory componentto complement the theoretical understanding of concepts taught in the course lecture. As a result,students were not actively engaged in the learning process nor motivated to enroll in subsequentmicrowaves courses. Therefore, because they were not
, in2000’s decade, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) has developed a program tomotivate female high school students to pursue engineering [28]. However, these programs,although achieving relative success, involved students with a pre-existing interest in engineering-related careers. Also, these programs contained a very low part of female population of highschool in the U.S. [28].Similarly, the governments of other countries have recognized the importance of increasinginterest in the field of engineering and have developed policies to motivate women to work in thefield. For example, in March 2002, the Norwegian government passed legislation requiring that40 percent of the executive board of director members should be women by the year
reasoning to exploreself-efficacy.Self-Efficacy and Self-RegulationThe lack of progress in retaining women and minorities in engineering is partially due tostudents’ self-efficacy. Self-efficacy refers to a person’s belief that s/he is capable of takingaction to achieve a certain goal, such as completion of a college degree. Self-efficacy is formedby a person’s mastery experiences (previous success leads a person to believe s/he is capable ofcompleting a similar task), vicarious experiences (when a person sees someone else completing atask and believes s/he could do the same), social persuasions (supportive people in a person’s lifesuch as teachers, family, or mentors), and physiological reactions to a task (anxiety, etc.).Self-efficacy relates to
/latino_children_in_the_2010_census 2 Huband, F.L. (2006). “An International Flavor,” Editorial, PRISM magazine, ASEE, December. 3 Gibbons, M. T. (2011) “The Year in Numbers.” ASEE Profiles of Engineering and Engineering TechnologyColleges, 2011 Edition. 4 Frehill, L.M., DiFabio, N.M., & Hill, S.T. (2008). Confronting the "new" American dilemma --Underrepresented Minorities in Engineering: A data-based look at diversity. White Plains, NY: National ActionCouncil for Minorities in Engineering (NACME). 5 Tinto, V. (1994). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition (2nd ed.). Chicago:University of Chicago Press. 6 Noel, R. C., & Smith, S. E. (1996). Self-disclosure of college students to faculty: The influence of
intendedobjective. We had at least two translations per questions that were compared, which resulted inCATS-S v1. For the second activity, ten (10) graduate students from civil engineeringparticipated in a pilot study. They were asked to answer all 27 items of CATS-s v1, rate theclarity of each question, and provide suggestion to improve unclear questions. Nine (9) of thestudents completed their BA at a Hispanic University from Latin America. CATS-s v2 was thencreated after analyzing their responses. Finally, the third activity completed so far consisted oftesting the protocol to identify if bilingual students exhibit the same misconceptions (commonerrors) than those currently identified in CATS. Ten (10) Hispanic senior students from the civilengineering
experienceto make the idea of STEM more appealing to a wider, diverse group of students.Acknowledgment:The program described in this paper is run by the Center for Diversity and Inclusion ofMichigan Technological University under coordination of Ms. A. Step. The author of thispaper is not a staff member of the Center for Diversity and Inclusion. The author is anassistant professor at the Michigan Technological University and has served as Research Page 25.1214.10Undergraduate Academic Advisor for several students participating in the program.References:[1] S. C. MichiganWorks. "Building the Bridge to Tomorrow’s STEM Careers." http://www.scmw.org
School (Female) Middle School (Female) 5 7 3 8 Total male: 12 Total female: 11Pretest/posttest comparison has been done for 21 participants as depicted in Figure 1. Twoparticipants were unable to take the posttest due their involvements in other campus summeractivities. Pretest/Posttest Comparision 40 y = 0.0241x + 29.72 T R² = 0.0016 e 35 s
students.Acknowledgement: This study was conducted under NSF grant 087139: Evaluating Online MetacognitionTools and Strategies for Their Use. The author would like to thank the University of Michigan-Flint Office of Research for support in preparing the manuscript. Page 25.743.9References[1] Paris, S. G., & Winograd, P., (1990). Metacognition in academic learning and instruction. In B.F. Jones (Ed.),Dimensions of thinking and cognitive instruction. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, 15-44.[2] Chua E. F., Schacter, D. L., Rand-Giovannetti, E., Sperling, R. A., (2006). Understanding metamemory: neuralcorrelates of the cognitive process and subjective level of
, the impact is not as crucial. These numbers point out that bothrecruitment and retention are critical activities to ensuring that we increase the number ofengineering graduates.There are well-known largely untapped resources for more engineers: women, underrepresentedminorities, and community college transfers. In response to the need for more engineers, the IraA. Fulton Schools of Engineering has three National Science Foundation (NSF) S-STEMacademic scholarship programs for engineering and computer science students: one for lowerdivision students (#0807134), one for upper division transfer students (#0728965) (primarilyfrom local community colleges (CCs)), and one for upper division non-transfer students(#1060226), as well as graduate
3.2 Preference for a Value 3.1 Acceptance of a Value 2.0 Responding 2.3 Satisfaction in Response 2.2 Willingness to Respond 2.1 Acquiescence in Responding 1.0 Receiving 1.3 Controlled or Selected Attention 1.2 Willingness to Receive 1.1 AwarenessAdapted from Krathwohl, D. R., Bloom, B. S., & Masia, B. B. (1964). Taxonomy of educationalobjectives: The classification of educational goals, Handbook II: Affective Domain. New York:David McKay
activities which are designed to improve student learning outcomes.Dr. Rosalyn S. Hobson, Virginia Commonwealth University Page 25.711.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2012 Identifying significant features that impact URM students academic success and retention upmost using qualitative methodologies: focus groupsAbstract:The purpose of this research is to develop a hybrid framework to model first year studentacademic success and retention for Under Represented Minorities (URM) comprisingAfrican Americans, Hispanic Americans, and Native Americans. This model was
importance for Science and Engineering (S&E) to the United States has been documented ina series of reports for more than half a century. Nevertheless, critical issues for the nation’s S&Einfrastructure remain unsettled. Among them, America faces a demographic challenge withregards to its S&E workforce: Minorities are seriously underrepresented in science andengineering, yet they are also the most rapidly growing segment of the population.Underrepresented minority groups comprised 28.5 percent of our national population in 2006,yet in the same period, represented just 9.1 percent of college-educated Americans in science andengineering occupations. Minorities in science and engineering would need to triple theirnumbers to match their
answer a question about showing initiative, a student might think of a time whenas a member of the Society of Automotive Engineers, he or she had the idea to streamline aprocedure for installing the engine. The student would describe the task to be accomplished andthe actions done to complete the task, such as devising the solution, troubleshooting it, makingadjustments, implementing it, and seeing the successful result.Here is another, more detailed example from Drexel University’s Web site: Situation (S): Advertising revenue was falling off for my college newspaper, The Review, and large numbers of long-term advertisers were not renewing contracts. Task (T): My goal was to generate new ideas, materials and
. Page 25.1337.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2012 The Role Model Affect and Its Effect on Underrepresented Minorities Pursuing Doctorates in Engineering Education1. BackgroundRegardless of race or ethnicity, engineering education began to see a decline in enrollmentbeginning in the early 1990’s. To address this concern, among others, ABET adopted theEngineering Criteria 2000 (EC2000), which introduced a new paradigm in engineeringeducation.1 The new paradigms in engineering education went beyond the need to keep studentson the cutting edge of technology, but required students to have interpersonal skills, beinquisitive and innovative, and most importantly, possess inter
AC 2012-4681: SELECTION OF EFFECTIVE GROUPS IN ENGINEER-ING PROJECTS USING MANAGEMENT THEORY PRACTICEMr. Brian Robert Dickson, University of Strathclyde Page 25.1148.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2012 Selection of Effective Groups in Engineering Projects using Management Theory PracticeA study that is a work in progressIntroductionMany engineering courses incorporate group projects as standard. The challenge for mostacademics is selecting groups that are well balanced and will produce a fair result for allgroup members, that measure their technical abilitie,s and their
School: Why the most successful students of colour might be most likely to withdraw." Educational Psychology, 2006. 26(4): p. 563-577.7. Taylor, V.J. and G.M. Walton, "Stereotype Threat Undermines Academic Learning." Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 2011. 37(8): p. 1055-1067.8. Osborne, J.W., "Race and academic disidentification." Journal of Educational Psychology, 1997. 89(4): p. 728-735.9. Jones, S., "A Conceptual Model of Multiple Dimensions of Identity." Journal of college student development, 2000. 41(4): p. 405.10. Osborne, J.W., "Academics, Self-Esteem, and Race: A Look at the Underlying Assumptions of the Disidentification Hypothesis." Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
, Program Operations, of California MESA.References 1. STEM Learning in Afterschool: An Analysis of Impact and Outcomes. Afterschool Alliance, September 2011. 2. Crane, R., Thiry, H., and Laursen, S., “Broadening the View: First Steps Toward Mapping the National Landscape of Out-of-School-Time Science Education.” Presented at Inciting the Social Imagination: Education Research for the Public Good, Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA, April 8-12, 2011. 3. Eccles, J. S., Barber, B. L., Stone, M., and Hunt, J., “Extracurricular Activities and Adolescent Development.” Journal of Social Issues, 59(4), 2003, pp. 856-889. 4. Kane, M. A., Beals, C., Valeau, E. J
Engineer of 2020, Visions of Engineering in the New Century, National Academy of Engineering, 2004.3. Home-Douglas, P., “ASEE Today - President’s Profile - Looking Ahead,” ASEE Prism, American Society of Engineering Education, December 2005, Volume 15 Number 4.4. Harb, J., Rowley, R., Magleby, S., and Parkinson, A., “Going Global: Implementation of a College-Wide Initiative to Prepare Engineering and Technology Students for the 21st Century,” Proceedings Annual ASEE Meeting, Honolulu, Hawaii, June, 2007.5. Hawks, V., Harb, J., Magleby, S., and Parkinson, A., “A College-wide Approach for Teaching and Developing Leadership: Model, Framework and Outcomes,” Proceedings Annual ASEE Meeting, Austin
Librarianship 36:158-165, 2010.7. Meyers, KL, SE Silliman, and NL Gedde, A comparison of engineering students’ reflections on their first-year experiences, Journal of Engineering Education 99:169-178, 2010.8. Angelique, H, K Kyle, and E Taylor, Mentor and muses: new strategies for academic success, Innovative Higher Education 26:195-209, 2002.9. Khazanov, L, Mentoring at-risk students in a remedial mathematics course, Math and Computer Education 45:106-118, 2011.10. Rodger, S, and PF Tremblay, The effects of a peer mentoring program on academic success among first year university students, Canadian Journal of Higher Education 33:1-18, 2003.11. Thorsheim, H, H LaCost, and JL Narum, Peer mentoring of undergraduate research in
school.AcknowledgementThis project is funded by a grant received by the Department of Education under theMinority Science and Engineering Improvement Program. The findings and the viewsexpressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the positionof the United States Department of Education.References 1. Lopatto, David. “Undergraduate Research Experience Support Science Career Decisions and Active Learning” Life Sciences Education, Vol. 6, pp. 297-306. 2. Hu, Shouping, Kuh, George D., and Gayles, Joy G., “Engaging Undergraduate Students in Research Activities: Are Research Universities Doing a Better Job?” Innovative Higher Education, Vol. 32, pp.167-177 3. Zydney, Andrew L., Bennett, Joan S., Shahid, Abdus
, http://www.asee.org/papers-and-publications/publications/college-profiles/2010-profile-engineering-statistics.pdf5. Redmond, S. P. (1990). Mentoring and Cultural Diversity in Academic Settings. American Behavioral Scientist,34(2), 188-200.6. Hill, R. D., Castillo, L. G., Ngu, L. Q., & Pepion, K. (1999). Mentoring Ethnic Minority Students for Careers inAcademia: The WICHE Doctoral Scholars Program. The Counseling Psychologist, 27(6), 827-845.7. Zhu, J., Cox, M.F., Evangelou, D., Lynch, C., Fentiman, A.W., and Dunston F.S., Experiences of Scholars in theReinvigorating Engineering and Changing History Program: A Case Study of the First Graduate Student Cohort,2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition in Vancouver, BC, Canada.8.ABET (2010
isalways an additional help. When the professor poses a problem and then works with theclass to generate feedback to solve it, understanding for a Deaf student is enhanced. Page 25.1037.7 BLACKBOARD P 1 2 SFigure 1 – Basic classroom setup. As the professor (P) lectures, one interpreter (1)translates to the deaf student (S). Meanwhile, a second interpreter (2) is preparing for thenext topic, as well as assist the deaf student.Although I