Paper ID #25439Army Warrant Officer Career Fields Curriculum Transferability into Four-year Technology ProgramsDr. George D Ford, Western Carolina University Dr. George Ford P.E. is the Director of Mississippi State’s Building Construction Science (BCS) pro- gram. Dr. Ford has 15 years of industrial experience including corporate work, and 16 years of teaching experience at the post-secondary level. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019 Army warrant officer career fields curriculum transferability into four-year technology programsThere are forty-three
environment and can meet their educational goals.IntroductionThe Citadel has a well-known and highly-ranked engineering program. Most recently, it has beenrated as one of the top 25 engineering programs, by US News and World Report for Universitiesthat offer a master’s degree as the highest degree. It is also ranked the number one University inthe south for veteran students. Adapting to a growing student enrollment within any college isdifficult, particularly in a financially constrained environment and competing against colleges/universities that receive more funding and a progressive (versus traditional military) campusclimate. Veterans who are leaving the military and considering a second career as well as someactive duty students who are
policy describe compelling reasons why new science,technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education pathways, able to supportachievement among the nation’s nontraditional and underrepresented minority students, areneeded. Specifically, policy recommendations emphasize that increased enrollment and retentionof student veterans in STEM degree programs is critical to our nation’s capability to reachrequired levels of future STEM workers [1]. Moreover, since many SVSM are women and/orunderrepresented minorities, recruitment and retention of SVSM along STEM career pathways isvital for diversifying, as well as strengthening, the nation’s STEM workforce [2-4]. As a group,student veterans and service members (SVSM) are considered well-suited
, and nuclear engineering” [24]. The Navy ROTC classifiesacademic majors into desirability, with the most desirable Tier 1 majors including aerospace,chemical, electrical, mechanical, naval, nuclear, ocean, and systems engineering; Tier 2 majorsinclude civil, computer, and biomedical engineering [25]. There are also specific military postsavailable to civil engineers via the Navy Seabees, Navy Civil Engineering Corps, and ArmyCorps of Engineers. At one large, public institution among about 5000 undergraduate studentsenrolled in the College of Engineering, about 2% were participating in ROTC [unpublisheddata]. While these students will generally begin their careers in the military, many eventuallycomplete their service and enter engineering jobs
Education at Purdue University. She holds a Ph.D. in Learning, Teaching, and Social Policy from Cornell University, and an Ed.M. in Administration, Planning, and Social Policy from the Harvard Graduate School of Education.Prof. Michelle M. Camacho, University of San Diego Michelle M. Camacho is Professor of Sociology at the University of San Diego. She began her career at UC San Diego in 1999 as a postdoctoral fellow at the Center for US Mexican Studies, and later as a UC Faculty Fellow in Ethnic Studies. In 2015-16, she returned to UC San Diego as a fellow of the American c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019
weconceived of the studio courses, the intended aims were: • For faculty to help students connect the dots between the various content courses that students take during the semester and help them see how their learning fits into a broader perspective. The hope was that these connections between courses and their relation to the students’ career fields would result in a transformative learning experience [9]. • For computer students to form a cohort of peer learners early in their academic career. Many studies have shown that students who belong to a community of learners tend to be more engaged and are more likely to be successful in the program [10], [11]. Because military veteran students
immersion, experience and other factors from studentsentering college directly from high school completion [1]. Active duty military members shareall of these characteristics; however, they may also be connecting from a different time zone oreven a battlefield or base in hostile territory. With 840,000 military enrolments and $445 millionin expenditures (in 2006), there is significant interest, by universities, in targeting a militarystudent base [2]. To support these students Minnis says that military cultural training, outreachand services related to careers, counseling, health, disabilities, financial aid and businessconcerns are needed [3]. Many veteran friendly lists and accreditations consider these services,but fail to consider whether a
, gender and ethnicity issues, transfers, and matriculation models with MIDFIELD as well as student veterans in engi- neering. Her evaluation work includes evaluating teamwork models, broadening participation initiatives, and S-STEM and LSAMP programs.Prof. Michelle M. Camacho, University of San Diego Michelle M. Camacho is Professor of Sociology at the University of San Diego. She began her career at UC San Diego in 1999 as a postdoctoral fellow at the Center for US Mexican Studies, and later as a UC Faculty Fellow in Ethnic Studies. In 2015-16, she returned to UC San Diego as a fellow of the American c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019
Engineering Education Zone IV Conference 2014, Long Beach, CA, April 24-26, 2014.[16] J. Humphrey, “Getting Student Veterans Off the Sidelines,” accessed 5 March 2019, http://www.military.com/education/getting-veteran-students-off-the-sidelines.html[17] J. Lim et al, Engineering as a Pathway to Reintegration: Student Veterans’ Transition Experience into Higher Education and Civilian Society, Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition 2016, New Orleans, LA, June 26-29, 2016.[18] 2013 National Science Foundation Workshop, "Transitioning Veterans to Engineering Related Careers," National Science Foundation, Washington DC, 2013.[19] C. Mobley et al, Entering the Engineering Pathway: Student Veterans’ Decision to Major in
], specifically geared towards Veteran students. A formerly validatedsurvey, the Engineering Professional Responsibility Assessment (EPRA) [18], was selected asthe initial survey. This survey was selected because it targets students in their first year, anextremely important period concerning Veteran student retention. The EPRA is a 65-itemmeasure of social responsibility that conceptualizes social responsibility into eight distinct butrelated constructs (see Table 1). The EPRA contains Likert-type items that range from 1(Strongly Disagree) to 7 (Strongly Agree) which was shortened to 1-5 Likert scale for this study.Examples of items from the EPRA include, “It is important to me personally to have a career thatinvolves helping people”, and “I feel an
of this paper is to report the results of the 2018 ASEE Student Veteran Leadershiproundtable. This roundtable brought together a diverse group of veterans, engineering educators,and engineering student veteran researchers. Through a series of ideation exercises anddiscussions, the group examined the challenges student veterans traditionally face, on-goingsupport initiatives at their home institutions, and recommended actions for ASEE to pursue in theyears ahead. The topics discussed during the panel are related to previous research about thechallenges faced by veteran students beyond ETETE career paths. A series of novel initiativesare presented that may assist ASEE and university administrators more broadly in adopting afresh approach to