Experience program and an annual Research & Development Showcase featuring astudent research poster competition. The Nanotechnology Fellows Program targets freshmen and sophomores to influencestudents early in their academic careers, establish program longevity, and enable scaffolded andmodule-based learning. Program recruitment starts about one year in advance of the summerprogram. The program instructors give talks to incoming students and their parents describingthe program’s features and benefits. The talks take place during the university orientation weekand are repeated at the beginning of the academic year in the SEAS “Meet the Faculty” seminarsattended by all SEAS freshmen. The program leaders also hold informational office hours
didactic training and real world applications, and exposedthem to people working in a STEM field. Over a period of four years, STEP participants had theopportunity to tour several STEM industries in the metropolitan area.The 3+8 undergraduate research component of STEP provided participants with an 11-weekresearch experience. The 3-week session introduced students to research through partnering witha faculty member at the 2-year institution; this was followed by an 8-week research experienceguided by research faculty members at 4-year institutions. In both components, students worked20-25 hours per week. Students participating in the 3+8 program gained experience in collectingdata, monitoring their progress, solving problems and troubleshooting
faculty mentoring, as both can work togetherto provide a more complete mentoring experience. For example, students who may not want todiscuss certain personal issues with a faculty member may be more open with their peer mentor.Finally, research mentoring is provided though a three-hour workshop certifying the students as“Ready For Research,” and requiring the students to volunteer for and present a poster at theUniversity of Cincinnati’s Undergraduate Research Conference held each year in April. FSSPScholars who participate in a faculty-led research project are encouraged to present their work atthe conference, and others are guided to present a poster reflecting their freshman-year FSSPexperience at the conference.Pathway to Graduate School
education and careers in science.7 Researchunaccompanied by dissemination, however, makes the research process incomplete. Publishingoriginal research is the culminating step in the research process and an exceptional piece ofresearch will not matter if no one ever gets a chance to read it and to use it to inform futurescholarship, policies, and/or decision making.8 Not only does publishing the results of theresearch complete the project, but it also provides its own set of benefits including professionallypresenting a representation of completed undergraduate work, receiving feedback from a broadercommunity, increasing chances of graduate school acceptance, and distinguishing oneself in thejob market.8 Dissemination activities include poster
about a class.! radical change in the person. These events are unplanned, unanticipated and uncontrolled” 6, p. 77. Critical events can be:! 1) ‘Extrinsic,’ produced by events external to the faculty member, such as the merger of Poly with Fulton,! 2) ‘Intrinsic,’ events that occur within the individual and happen in the natural progression of a faculty member’s career, such as working towards tenure or a mid-career move, and! 3) ‘Personal,’ events that happen in an individual’s personal life, such as having a baby or an illness.!Teaching Discussion of teaching
graduate studies; 2) to increase the number ofwomen and minority students from underrepresented groups who engage in security research andprovide support for them to become security researchers; 3) to provide research opportunities ina high-demand area to those who would otherwise have no access to research facilities; and 4) toincrease awareness of, and approaches to, challenging problems of security in mobile devicesand networks. We shared our experience of student recruitment, faculty mentor support, researchactivity planning and logistics of running an REU site at high living cost metropolitan area. Theoutcome and success stories of students’ accomplishments are outlined in this article.IntroductionAs more smartphones, tablets and other mobile
, and largely presumed by professional associations and licensingbodies. Many formal courses and programs have in turn been created to promote professionalresponsibility and ethical integrity among engineering graduates. Other interventions (e.g.,service learning programs) have also been developed to more broadly challenge engineeringstudents to develop as engaged citizens and community members. Yet there has been a notablelack of research on measures and understandings of social and ethical responsibility amongundergraduate engineering students. Further, few studies have looked at how such indicatorschange over time and are impacted by specific kinds of learning experiences. As a result, facultyand administrators often have little evidence to
Graduate/5 year 1i Based on pre data collected in the Fall of 2014 by project evaluators.ii Data presented in the following tables are based on Fall 2014 responses to evaluation surveys.Additional data for spring 2015 are available; fall 2015 data are in the process of being collectedand analyzed.iii Following is a listing of papers available for download review and attendance.References 1. A. W. Astin, What matters in college?: Four critical years revisited vol. 1: Jossey-Bass San Francisco, 1993. 2. R. J. Light, The Harvard Assessment Seminars Second Report 1992: Explorations with Students and Faculty about Teaching, Learning, and Student Life: Harvard Graduate School of Education, 1992. 3. R. J. Light, Making
program incorporatedafternoon laboratory rotations that both reflected the multidisciplinary characteristics of thecritical infrastructure security problems and addressed the often-limited attention span of theADHD student. The extended laboratory research experience allowed the students to form an in-depth understanding of a critical infrastructure research challenge related to their academicmajors. The students’ daily schedule, then, consisted of spending mornings and early afternoonsin their primary lab and afternoons in their laboratory rotation. Primary laboratory experienceswere facilitated both by a graduate student and a faculty mentor. The rotations lasted for oneweek, which maintained student interest that can often be lost while
engineeringidentity30. Often engineering faculty view an individual’s identity as irrelevant to the engineeringworkplace. In such a “color-blind” perspective, individual characteristics should play no role inscientific work. However, significant amounts of research demonstrate that no person is “color-blind”31. Additionally, faculty may not be influenced by the theoretical developments explainingthe importance of students’ identities28. Due to the lack of exploration of social aspects ofengineering, conversations centered around normative and non-normative values are almost non-existent. Limited conversations about students identities and cultural norms allows the dominanttraits of the field's practitioners to perpetuate despite evidence indicating a need for
Advanced-Materials Training(RETREAT) Research Experience for Undergraduates (REU) program is designed to address theretention concern. This program exposes students to a number of specific engineeringapplications through a variety of advanced materials research projects. Each student is alsomatched with a faculty member and a graduate student, who mentor the student through thestages of the RETREAT program and how the students’ skills and interests could be well-suitedto a technical position in industry or a graduate degree in engineering. The entrepreneurial twistis included to reinvigorate upper level students and encourage their continuation in a STEMfield. This report provides an outline of how students are recruited and selected – with
experience.Students participating in industry experiences are more likely to stay in industry after graduation(72%), while most students participating in undergraduate research are more likely to attendgraduate school (75%). These findings suggest that early on (probably during freshman andsophomore years), most students (about 70%) identify with being the engineer practitioner (thusfollowing an industry career path) or the engineer researcher (thus following the graduate schoolcareer path).The insight provided by engineering education literature is that non-curricular designexperiences, and other non-curricular learning activities, should strive to enhance existingcurricular opportunities, filling in academic gaps that traditional curricular activities do
employees’ Position Descriptions. Position Descriptions represent aclear opportunity in our efforts to empower faculty and staff to identify, agree upon, and carryout responsibilities that can be outside of the traditional norms in the academy. Our School willidentify Change Leaders and formally allot 10% of their effort toward shifting the School’sculture to re-situate learning and instruction. More broadly, all faculty will be expected toadvance and equalize undergraduate and graduate student success across demographics throughcommunicating clear expectations and holding people accountable to these expectations. Thisapproach places responsibility for culture transformation on each community member asopposed to relying on a dedicated few. Such an
target tracking and physical layer communications. Her work on target detection and tracking is funded by the Office of Naval Research. Dr. Nelson is a 2010 recipient of the NSF CAREER Award. She is a member of Phi Beta Kappa, Tau Beta Pi, Eta Kappa Nu, and the IEEE Signal Processing, Communications, and Education Societies.Dr. Margret Hjalmarson, George Mason University Margret Hjalmarson is an Associate Professor in the Graduate School of Education at George Mason University and currently a Program Officer in the Division of Research on Learning in Formal and Infor- mal Settings at the National Science Foundation. Her research interests include engineering education, mathematics education, faculty development
Technology and a B.S. in Civil Engineering from Bucknell University.Dr. Eric C Pappas, James Madison University Eric Pappas is Professor of Integrated Science and Technology at James Madison University and formerly a faculty member in the College of Engineering at Virginia Tech (1993-2003).Dr. Jesse Pappas, James Madison University Jesse Pappas studied self-insight, intentional self-development, and the role of emotion in self-perception at University of Virginia, where he received a Ph.D. in social psychology in 2012. His dissertation project involved adapting established professional development tools to facilitate the personal and academic suc- cess of college students. Jesse currently serves as Assessment Director and
peer reviewed conference proceedings articles in these areas. He has B.S. in ME, and both M.S. and Ph.D. in IE. He is a member of ASEE, INFORMS, and a senior member of IIE.Dr. Michael Johnson, Texas A&M University Dr. Michael D. Johnson is an associate professor in the Department of Engineering Technology and In- dustrial Distribution at Texas A&M University. Prior to joining the faculty at Texas A&M, he was a senior product development engineer at the 3M Corporate Research Laboratory in St. Paul, Minnesota. He received his B.S. in mechanical engineering from Michigan State University and his S.M. and Ph.D. from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Dr. Johnson’s research focuses on design tools
National Science Foundation(NSF) venture to develop a nanotechnology-based educational intervention to increase a large(~2,000 students per year) number of future practicing engineers’ awareness of nanotechnology.One of the primary goals of this NSF grant was to expose the next generation of engineers tonanotechnology through the creation and implementation of nanotechnology interventions in acollege-wide first-year engineering (FYE) course, while adhering to the current learningobjectives and time constraints of the course. This endeavor required an effective partnershipbetween chemical engineering and engineering education faculty members such that realisticimpacts could be had in the FYE classrooms. In this way, the subject experts could