Paper ID #11885Two Body Solutions: Strategies for the Dual-Career Job SearchDr. Shannon Ciston, University of California, Berkeley Shannon Ciston is a Lecturer and Director of Undergraduate Education in the Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering at the University of California, Berkeley. Dr. Ciston holds degrees in chemical engineering from Northwestern University (PhD) and Illinois Institute of Technology (BS). She teaches undergraduate and graduate courses in technical communications and applied pedagogy, and conducts engineering education research.Dr. Katy Luchini-Colbry, Michigan State University Katy
quantifytheir undergraduate experience. Students are able to track their progress, design their ownacademic path to graduation, and develop their own enrichment activity plan that best fits theirspecific interest. The engineering portfolio also assists students to prepare their resume for jobinterviews and, when used as a tool for interviewing, the portfolio highlights tangibleexperiences outside what is normally found in transcripts and conventional resumes.Our approach focuses on capturing the entire breath of each student’s educational experience,while setting the foundation for students to build an open-ended self-guided career plan thatdraws from their skills, experiences, and achievements that comprise their engineering portfolio
colleges to undergraduate serving institutions and research-focused universities,both with and without engineering education degree programs.1 With such a wide range ofinstitutions being served with Student Chapters, it can be difficult to ensure that all needs are metand all Chapters have the same goals.According to the ASEE Student Chapter Mission,1 the general mission of Student Chapters is: I. To develop relationships with local schools (K-12) and aid them in fostering student interest in future careers and study in engineering and engineering technology II. To encourage engineering undergraduate students to continue their studies on the graduate level III. To increase the interest of engineering graduate students in
learning, and preparation of engineering graduate students for future careers. Her dissertation research focuses on studying the writing and argumentation patterns of engineering graduate students.Dr. Monica Farmer Cox, Purdue University, West Lafayette Monica F. Cox, Ph.D., is an Associate Professor in the School of Engineering Education at Purdue Univer- sity and is the Inaugural Director of the Engineering Leadership Minor. She obtained a B.S. in mathemat- ics from Spelman College, a M.S. in industrial engineering from the University of Alabama, and a Ph.D. in Leadership and Policy Studies from Peabody College of Vanderbilt University. Teaching interests relate to the professional development of graduate engineering
, 4year summer program that provides academic training, mentorship, and hands-on experience formiddle and high school students that are interested in pursuing STEM careers. A series of newcourses that are to be offered as standardized courses at participating TexPREP institutionsthroughout the state are being developed by undergraduate engineering students.Nine undergraduate students majoring in mechanical and civil engineering and computer sciencewere hired to write the TexPREP course curriculum with the idea that students would be able todevelop course content that the participants could easily relate to. Following development of thecurriculum, undergraduate students actively participated in the implementation and reviewprocess. The primary
, function to privilege and perpetuate certainunderstandings of the field. Autoethnographic techniques are used to construct three accounts ofthe student’s encounters with an upper level administrator, various members of faculty, and anacademic advisor. Critical analysis of these experiences using a prior evidence-based model ofstories ‘told’ about engineering in the public discourse reveals tensions between the freshmanstudent’s values and career interests and the emergent, dominant discourse he observed in hisundergraduate program. These tensions are described in terms of: i) The prioritization of nationaleconomic recovery and growth over the life and career goals of individuals; ii) A predominantfocus on the quantitative and technical aspects of
major with a high level of one-on-one advising. However, a high degree of flexibility also contributes. In the LSE program,iterative revision and recreation of an individualized curriculum and career plan are understoodas signs of success rather than failure or deviation. Students are encouraged to understand anddesign their major as a “whole-person technical degree” that does not require them to pass, toassimilate, to compartmentalize, or to conform to stereotypes. We suggest that this holisticflexibility may disrupt barriers such as impostor syndrome by positioning the student not asimpostor but as designer and creator – even when enrolled in technical courses in which thesex/gender ratio is skewed male. Lessons learned from “liberal studies
Department Head for Graduate Programs in Vir- ginia Tech’s Department of Engineering Education. She has her doctorate in Engineering Education and her strengths include qualitative and mixed methods research study design and implementation. She is/was PI/Co-PI on 8 funded research projects including a CAREER grant. She has won several Virginia Tech awards including a Dean’s Award for Outstanding New Faculty. Her research expertise includes using motivation and related frameworks to study student engagement in learning, recruitment and retention in engineering programs and careers, faculty teaching practices and intersections of motivation and learning strategies. Matusovich has authored a book chapter, 10 journal
experiences.Dr. Marie C Paretti, Virginia Tech Marie C. Paretti is an Associate Professor of Engineering Education at Virginia Tech, where she co- directs the Virginia Tech Engineering Communications Center (VTECC). Her research focuses on com- munication in engineering design, interdisciplinary communication and collaboration, design education, and gender in engineering. She was awarded a CAREER grant from the National Science Foundation to study expert teaching in capstone design courses, and is co-PI on numerous NSF grants exploring com- munication, design, and identity in engineering. Drawing on theories of situated learning and identity development, her work includes studies on the teaching and learning of communication
1 illustrates the investigation embeddedwithin the conceptual framework. Developing a community of practice can be an effectivemeans for helping new teachers learn to teach. “Communities of practice are groups of peoplewho share a concern, a set of problems, or a passion about a topic, and who deepen theirknowledge and expertise in the area by interacting on an ongoing basis” (p. 5).2 The biomedicalengineering fellows were interested in learning about and educating students with reform-basedinstructional practices. It is anticipated that fellows work together with faculty and mentorteachers as a community to develop a shared knowledge about the practice of teaching science inpreparation for future careers as tenured faculty members at the
...there’s a Ph.D. in Engineering Education?” The First Year Experience of Three Students in an Engineering Education Department. Proceedings of the 2012 ASEE Southeast Section Conference , April, 2012. 10. Bruce, J. W. and L. Bruce, “This Town Ain’t Big Enough for the Both of Us: Two Engineering Educator Careers, One Department,” Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education, 2005. 11. Bruce, L. and J. W. Bruce, “Maximizing Your Productivity as a Junior Faculty Member: Balancing Research, Teaching, and Service,” Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education, 2004. 12. Bruce, J. W. and L. Bruce, “Maximizing Your Productivity as a Junior Faculty Member: Being Effective in the Classroom,” Proceedings of the
students enterthe College of Engineering. With this mix of challenges, many students end up dropping out ofthis academic and career choice (4).Several active learning based programs attempt to alleviate these student difficulties and attritionby offering peer administered active learning sessions that help guide younger students to learnand to use skills necessary for success in STEM disciplines: Peer Led Team Learning (5, 6),Supplemental Instruction (8), and Learning Assistant recitation (7), etc.). Louisiana StateUniversity’s College of Engineering determined that its students needed additional support in the Page 26.645.2traditional gateway
component selection and everything in between.”Ten of the students reported improved professional skills. While some just generally mentionedteamwork or communications, several gave specific examples of management-level skills. Someexamples of these were the ability to break a large project into smaller pieces, to manage a teamof software engineers, and to “let go and delegate tasks.”Career ImplicationsTAs were also asked about how their participation helped them in their search for employment,be it a fulltime job, a co-op, or an internship. Thirteen of the TAs said their participation in thedesign project development helped them in their job search. Keeping in mind that 8 of therespondents were in their first term of working on the project and 4
facilitating courses that already includeactive learning techniques, and students who hope to pursue a career in teaching and may need todesign their own courses in the future.Defining Course GoalsGoals are the foundation of course reform. Although TAs are typically not responsible fordefining the course goals (this is normally the instructor’s responsibility), an important aspectemphasized in the “SAIL TA Training” was to ask the TAs to 1) reflect on why it is important toknow the goals of the course, 2) articulate what these goals are, and 3) understand why/how theinstructor plans to use active learning methods to achieve these goals. This step ensures thatinstructors and TAs communicate the same goals and expectations to the students.To model these
engineering,complicating any analysis of diversification efforts. In the case of economic competitiveness, thegoal is simply production of the maximum number of STEM graduates. The strategy is puttingmore bodies into the beginning of the STEM education pipeline so more come out the other end.In the case of educational pluralism, the goal is more about economic (and career) opportunity“for all,” and inclusiveness and diversity as desirable social and educational foundations in theirown right. These two diversification logics often fold together in practice—and are oftenconflated by STEM education reform advocates—confusing the conceptual foundations formany STEM inclusiveness initiatives. Therefore, while policy support for broad-based STEMrecruitment