translating those strategies to design tools and education. She teaches design and en- trepreneurship courses at the undergraduate and graduate levels, focusing on front-end design processes.Dr. Diane L. Peters, Kettering University Dr. Peters is an Assistant Professor of Mechanical Engineering at Kettering University. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2018 Engineering Industry Perspectives and Policies Related to Employees’ Pursuit of Engineering Doctoral TrainingI. IntroductionSupporting multiple pathways through engineering education, including at the graduate level, is acommonly cited priority in conversations about the future of engineering [1], [2]. Similarly,increasing the
, this declaration of need does not answer thequestion of how. One possible direction focuses on improving the field relevant, but non-technical skills that help engineers as professionals. The authors of this paper have recentlycompleted the first round of a pilot program that professionally develops graduate engineeringstudents [1]. As a part of the program, students compare self-given competency ratings to thosefrom select peers and their academic advisor. This multi-source feedback (MSF) approach todevelopment gives participants a glimpse of their professional reputation from different angles.After all rater’s submit their feedback, ratees meet with their advisors and create a developmentplan based on these results. Equipped with multi
similar results. Through this paper, the authors share best practices andlessons learned as well as a blueprint for any institution looking to go through a similar process.Suggestions are made as to how instructors might leverage the digital assets created through thisprocess to benefit their on-ground students.I. IntroductionThe landscape of course offerings in higher education has shifted greatly within the past decade.One of the greatest changes has been the evolution of online courses. In fall 2015, 29.7% of allhigher education students were taking at least one distance education course [1]. Over the pastfew years, online education enrollments have been increasing at a rate that exceeds the growth ofenrollments in higher education overall
information, data and science literacy skills that will allow them to succeed in a global economy. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2018Implementing a Graduate Class in Research Data Management for Science/Engineering StudentsIntroduction: Research data management (RDM) is an integral part of engineering and science graduatestudent life, both during graduate school and in their future occupations. Federal agencies,including NSF[1], NIH[2], and USGS[3], are now requiring the submission of a DataManagement Plan (DMP) when submitting proposals for funding. Carlson et al. further advocatefor RDM by stating “… it is not simply enough to teach students about handling data, they mustknow
a Masters degreein Data Science in 2014. This is a two-year program covering courses in rigorous Math andprogramming, as well as courses entailing soft skills such as visual storytelling and consultingskills.One of the challenges for faculty on the admission committee in the past few years has beenselecting the best criteria for student admission. Typically, in engineering disciplines theadmission decision is based on students’ performance on courses such as calculus, physics andpre-engineering topics [1]. However, due to the nature of Data Science field the applicants comefrom very diverse undergraduate programs. For instance, some of our top graduating students hadan undergraduate degree in Creative Writing or Healthcare. We have
that help emerging scholars become capable, critical, andgenerous readers of published disciplinary scholarship. Specifically, we note the potentialimportance of considering the synergy between individual and group contributions, the balancebetween seriousness and lightheartedness, and the need for both opportunities to learn andopportunities to be aware of learning.IntroductionReading published scholarly work is a central activity in academic life. Further, readingpublished scholarly work is a challenge [1], [2], [3]. Such challenges are further exacerbated infields characterized by flux in what is acceptable methodologically, epistemologically, anddiscursively [4], [5]. Such flux is common in interdisciplinary contexts. While approaches
schools in the US [1]. For example, the University of Marylandhas a “Future Faculty Program” in their College of Engineering that requires programparticipants to enroll in three one-credit hour training courses, co-teach a course with a facultymentor and also mentor a less-experienced undergraduate or graduate student. The programcurrently has 25 students enrolled in the program, though students in Computer Science canparticipate as well [2].Another offering available to graduate students is the Georgia Tech “Tech to Teaching” program.Here, students can complete two levels of training: Level 1: Foundations of Teaching andLearning and Level 2: Teaching Capstone. The Level 1 training requires students to complete10 foundational learning outcomes
facilitate, throughmetadiscursive support, the socialization of international students in the University ofMississippi graduate engineering programs into written discursive practices of theircommunities.Theoretical BackgroundCentral to this discursive challenge that many international graduate students face upon entranceinto graduate programs is the notion that students must be socialized, or enculturated, into theoral and written discourse of their respective discourse community. This idea of discoursesocialization is cleverly viewed by Casanave [1] as a set of “writing games” for which studentsmust learn the rules—or learn how to adapt the rules—in order to participate in their discoursecommunities. Too often it is assumed and expected that
development for STEM graduate students, the Council ofGraduate studies recommended, “Greater alignment among employers and universities to ensurethat the professional development experiences provided to advanced STEM graduate students arerelevant, and where possible tailored, to employer needs.”1 They also recommended greaterpartnerships between STEM graduate programs and employers to better prepare students whowere going into non-academic careers, and that professional development complement thestudents’ academic coursework.1 Professional Science Master’s (PSM) degree programs werestarted in the late 1990’s to meet industry’s demand for STEM graduates who also had businessprofessional skills.2The Master of Science in Professional Science (MSPS
from their competitors and prospective studentsenjoy increased access to information about various programs. Armed with this data, prospectivestudents can identify, apply to and enroll in the program that best supports their specific careergoals.Background Graduate programs in the U.S. play an important role in advancing their graduates’ careergoals. In the last 30 years, overall enrollment in graduate programs has continued to increase at arate higher than undergraduate degree enrollment, with individuals obtaining their master’sdegrees increasing 240% between 1985 and 2013 [1]. However, in the 10-year period ending in2013, obtaining a master’s degree became a “less popular” option for students. A strong U.S. andglobal economy provides
feedback from responses from the first workshop. This paperexamines the results of the two GRE workshops, and describes (1) the two workshops, (2) thesurvey used to evaluate the workshops, and (3) the results from the pre and post survey. Theresults indicated that 89% of participants agreed or strongly agreed that they were more preparedto take the GRE after attending the first workshop with an 11% increase in the level of awarenessabout the GRE from the pre and post survey. There were two major changes between the twoworkshops: (1) an increase in the advertisement to the students and (2) the Dean of GraduateSchool presented the opening information. The results from the second workshop indicated a22% increase in the level of awareness about the
process can be used forboth online and onsite offerings of the program.The paper will also present assessments of the capstone course and evaluations on studentlearning, successes in achieving the program learning outcomes and the usefulness of theprogram in solving real world problems. The paper will also discuss ideas on the potential toexpand this framework for other programs and additional enhancements.Graduate Capstone MethodologiesCapstone projects by definition serves two audiences namely, the academic and the sponsor orthe client. Academic audience look for a well laid out research: formal systematic application ofscientific methods to the study of problems [1, 2]. Project sponsor/client, on the other hand, lookfor well laid pragmatic
. [1]. As programs strive to diversify they also desire to beinclusive. Inclusion is an important factor in supporting the retention of individuals frommarginalized and/or underrepresented groups. In order to do so, it is important to address issueslike microaggressions and implicit bias. Microaggressions are subtle unconscious insultsdirected toward minorities, women, or those from a subordinate group [2], [3]. Implicit biasrefers to subconscious opinions or stereotypes that influence our understanding, behaviors, anddecisions [4]. These subtle or unconscious behaviors can negatively affect recipients.Researchers have shown faculty regardless of gender were equally likely to exhibit bias againstfemale students and these biases lessened the
: Support for student writing can be achieved through community-based exchange,even with limited resourcesProviding the tools for graduate students to collaborate, share and receive feedback,constructively discuss, actively learn, and experience first hand, a microcosm of scientificcommunication, succeeded in supporting student writing and critical thinking as well as breakingstudent isolation. A paucity of resources should not inhibit educators from launching a scientificwriting assistance program, as they can guide the growth of a learning community that providessuch assistance.1 IntroductionIn this paper we present various activities that engineering educators can use to provideassistance to graduate students in their scientific writing. As
engineering education in the US, these KSA frameworksare plentiful (e.g., ABET Criteria 3; NAE Engineer of 2020 list of student attributes; ASEE’sTUEE report). In contrast, such frameworks are much less common in graduate engineeringeducation. Yet as the call for change in the undergraduate engineering outcomes brought aboutthe KSA frameworks for undergraduate engineering educators, similar calls for change acrossthe globe are now being issued for graduate student outcomes. Thus far, there has not been thewidespread development of graduate engineering KSA frameworks. The major exception is thevery comprehensive Vitae Research Development Framework [1] developed in the UK, which issimilar to the undergraduate KSA frameworks and has interesting
attendees ultimately apply and areadmitted. We are continuously seeking ways to improve the event based on participant, faculty,staff and graduate student feedback.IntroductionAccording to the National Science Foundation, women and underrepresented minorities (AfricanAmericans, Hispanics, and Native Americans) represent 24.1% and 6.4% of the engineeringgraduate student population nationally [1]. These data confirm the need to increase theparticipation of these groups in engineering graduate education. With representation ofunderrepresented minority students and women so low, there are concerns about the ability tocreate the most innovative solutions to the most challenging engineering questions in society.However, increasing representation of
the creative process, and that the experience dispelled misconceptions ofcreativity that it only applies to the arts. Limitations of the study and future directions for theprogram and related research are discussed.IntroductionAccording to the National Science Foundation (NSF), Research Experiences for Undergraduates(REU) programs strive to increase the number of students, including those from underrepresentedgroups, who are involved in research in meaningful ways (NSF, Retrieved February 1, 2018). TheNSF Program solicitation estimates awarding grants for approximately 180 new REU sites eachyear with anticipated funding, including new sites and supplemental awards, exceeding $68million annually. The number of awards and the amount of
self-efficacy and GTA perceptions of whether teaching skills transfer to otherprofessional contexts.IntroductionThe majority of graduate teaching assistants (GTAs) do not have prior teaching experience whenthey start their appointments. Although workshops offered by a campus-level teaching center area quick and efficient way to introduce new GTAs to their roles, follow-up programs are needed tofurther develop their teaching effectiveness and to train them properly in the specific teachingrequirements of their disciplines. Santhanam and Codner reported benefits to tailoring GTAtraining for particular academic disciplines. 1 Further, Nicklow et al. described some specificbenefits to discipline-specific GTA training for a Civil Engineering
with evaluating the relationships among differentvariables in the recruiting process. It is hypothesized that the analysis will reveal possible areasof improvements through the recruiting funnel that may lead to an increase in the retention of thestudent from application to matriculation. Once these relationships are established and evaluated,a set of recommendations will be given to increase international recruitment, improve theallocation of resources and boost features of the program that are appealing to prospectivestudents.1. IntroductionThe Master of Science in Operations Management (OMGT) is a 30 credit-hour programcontained within the Industrial Engineering department at the University of Arkansas. Theprogram was created in 1974 “to
) provides an extensive analysis of the practices thatengineering mentors or postdoctoral researchers use when mentoring undergraduate studentsparticipating in an engineering or science undergraduate research experience. The purpose ofAhn’s study was to identify mentors who were effective instructors and to develop a survey toassess mentoring abilities in an undergraduate research setting. Based on results of anexploratory factor analysis of the survey data, four main effective mentoring strategies wereidentified: 1) the mentor’s willingness to work with the mentee in a research setting; 2) thementor’s ability to identify the mentee’s research knowledge and skills, and provideindividualized support; 3) the mentor being attentive to the daily tasks
to comments are usually addressed at the beginning of the nextclass session. This paper investigates if a MP process can be effective in an online course setting.It also investigates and shares best practices that would be needed for a successfulimplementation.The modified Muddy Points methodology includes four steps: 1) collection of student reflectionsof unclear concepts; 2) assessment of student reflections in order to identify misconceptions thatcan keep students from achieving learning outcomes; 3) generating formative feedback, and 4)selecting and using delivery tool that quickly provides formative feedback to students. Thisprocess was implemented and studied in two fully online Materials Science courses. In onecourse, all of the steps
advances in technology and scientific knowledge coupled with dynamic changes in globalsocieties call for a STEM workforce that is not only technically advanced in their disciplines, butalso readily adaptable and responsive to evolving and emerging opportunities. Twenty-firstcentury scientists and engineers must possess skills that enable them to reach beyond thelaboratory, across disciplines, and into communities to identify issues and develop solutions thatincrease both resilience and sustainability. To prepare this new kind of leader, graduate trainingmust embrace innovative approaches that inculcate critical professional skills that transcenddisciplines and prepare STEM students for a diverse range of career choices [1]-[5]. Publicinstitutions
continue to develop through their experience aswell? In order to be contributing members of a field, graduate students need to learn and developin areas beyond just the core technical competencies of their field. Opportunities for achievingthis development exist throughout their graduate studies, but students do not always recognize orunderstand how to use these opportunities. To productively steer student development, someresponsibility falls on the student’s academic advisor to guide and support the student growthprocesses. Traditionally, when considering the relationship between student and advisor,researchers have almost exclusively focused on examining the development of the student[1][2][3][4] or assessing the student’s satisfaction with