several department-specific Comm Labs, 2)Brandeis’s centralized Comm Lab for their Division of Science, and 3) Rose-Hulman’sundergraduate-only centralized Comm Lab for students using a multidisciplinary, co-curricularspace. We then discuss these adaptations with a focus on how our different institutional profilesshape our Comm Lab design. Specifically, we draw connections between institutional data andthe disciplinary focus, scale, and institutional fit of each Comm Lab. We conclude by sharingdata about the Comm Labs’ success, reflecting on the importance of continued data collection,and considering the value of cross-institutional collaboration. Our conclusion reflects both thelimitations of our study and the need for ongoing research. These
. Section V provides a conclusion and implications.II. MethodsThis study was conducted by a combination of a survey of the faculty advisors/counselorscommunity within SWE, and through the analysis of written reflections provided by the authorsof the paper, all of whom are faculty advisors and/or counselors. In 2017, this group of eightadvisors and/or counselors identified factors that contribute to their level of involvement inrunning student organizations. Their individual experiences were shared with respect to their rolein the section’s long-term and short-term goals for the success and sustainability of studentorganizations.The survey was developed based on the goals of the study, with several rounds of review andrevision to ensure that the
your own business. The next set of 47 questions asked students to show their level ofagreement (on a 7-point Likert scale from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”) withstatements that measure three realms and eight dimensions (see Table 2 below for an explanationof each).Finally, students were asked about their experiences with volunteering and a set of demographicquestions (gender, engineering major, year in school, GPA, race or ethnicity, previous engineeringwork experience, first-generation status, religion, and age). The post-test additionally askedstudents to reflect on their experiences in the course and if they would be willing to do afollow-up interview. Table 2: EPRA Realms and Dimensions Realm
● Room (e.g. BL 266A) ● Instructor (e.g. “Jack H”)In the application, these columns are renamed to standard titles and new columns are added. Theprogram has been written in a modular format to allow easy substitution of titles. The outputspreadsheet is shown in Figure 2. In addition to renaming the columns, a few basic calculationshave been made. This includes changing the time from AM/PM to military formats. The timedurations have been calculated. This requires some correction for academic practices such as 50minutes = 1 hour and a 3-hour laboratory might be 2 hours and 45 minutes. It is worth notingthat the durations of ECET 452 and EE 311 are not an even or half and the times for thesecourses will need to be adjusted. The weight reflects
selected to gain a broadrepresentation of the engineering disciplines (bioengineering, computer science, chemicalengineering, civil engineering, electrical engineering, industrial engineering, and mechanicalengineering) and age (millennials with a mean age of 22.1 years). The social groups used toidentify the students reflected diversity in self-identified gender (15 female, 15 male, and 2transgender) and race/ethnicity (9 Asian, 9 White, 4 Black/African American, 7 Hispanic/Latino,and 3 multiracial students). As mentioned above, students were asked open ended questions onattributes of leaders and the findings presented in this paper focus specifically on 10 questionsrelated to prototypical attributes of leaders. Samples of these questions
of the previous year, we completedreflections on what impact we would like to achieve within our positions and the degree to whichwe believed we achieved this impact. We also reflected on strategic actions we took to achieveimpact. In this work, we leveraged the framework developed by London [8] that defines impacton the basis of scientific, contextual, and societal components.Using an emergent analysis approach, we identified impacts and strategic actions that werepresent across our positions and institutional contexts. We subsequently developed a quantitativesurvey instrument to more broadly investigate the impact and strategic actions of other earlycareer engineering education faculty. This also involved investigating influencers such as
with the faculty engagement model proposed by Kathrin as well as the faculty feedback, allT&L Academy events have both academic and social emphasis. A typical agenda for SummerWorkshop includes one featured presentation or training session led by invited speakers that helpour faculty to gain new knowledge, skills or insight, plus multiple social activities that fosterconversation, reflection, and shared-learning among participants. The topics of the summerworkshop and the forums are solicited through a faculty survey to make sure that the contents ofT&L events are aligned with the faculty interest. In addition to face-to-face meetings, a Moodlesite for the T&L Academy has been established to share workshop and forum presentations
more likely to create drawings of white, male engineers who areworking alone than drawings of women, minorities, or people working in groups [13]-[17]. DAEstudies also indicate that children often have a narrow view of the work of engineers, oftendrawing them as laborers who build and fix things [14]-[18].The development and use of a Draw-An-Engineering-Teacher Test could provide pre and in-service teachers with the opportunity to capture their mental images and reflect on what theybelieve engineering does or would look like in their classrooms. These depictions could aideeducation faculty and professional development providers in identifying these potentialmisconceptions and give participants the opportunity to reflect upon how they can
discouraging motivations are competitive classroom environments andgrades [14]. While grades are an evaluation of student learning inferred by the instructor,students’ grades have been interpreted by students as a measure of success and achievement.Students with lower performance or grades, therefore, become less motivated and doubt theirabilities to be successful in the engineering program. Other educational factors reported asdiscouraging to students’ motivation were time commitment on course tasks and the quality ofteaching with large effects for female than male students [14]. Although grades reflect students’competence and indicate growing opportunities, how students interpret the grades to impact theirmotivation and persistence in
the course, reflection on factors that would encourage ordiscourage students from pursuing their projects, and employment status during and after thecourse. The results of the interviews were assessed through thematic content analysis. Theinterviews suggest that (1) that students do not continue with their projects because they cannottake time away from the paying jobs that are supporting their education, (2) that studentscompleting their junior year do not want to take time away from their senior-year studies, and(3) that students completing their senior year do not want to take the risk of pursuing a startupwhen they could instead obtain a “real” job. Additionally, student startups appear to have beendiscouraged by their expectation in the
grapplingof personal identity and existence in society.The acknowledgment and processing of these perspectives will be explored below using aframework of researcher racial and cultural positionality [4]. This framework will assist inpresenting the “seen, unseen, and unforeseen” [4] by beginning to (1) research the self, (2)research the self in relation to others, (3) engage in reflection and representation, and (4) shiftfrom self to system. By exploring these facets of our own personal perspective or positionality,we can begin to more adequately investigate the phenomenon of interest involving individualswith different life experiences than our own.Thoughts of Positionality from a Qualitative ResearcherA key practice that was established early in my
engineering outreach. They have a strong commitment toconducting lifelong STEM learning, as well as an audience that spans from pre-school through adult.Engineers and engineering societies looking to expand their outreach activities should explore and growthis partnership opportunity. This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant Number DRL-1657593. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.
make it more universal. The modified instrument, as shown in Appendix B, has notbeen validated. All the questionnaire items will be translated to Vietnamese by translators. The NOEinstrument will be distributed to the Vietnamese faculty when they sign the consent form.Participants will have ample time to complete the written questionnaire. This will allowparticipants to reflect on their NOE views in-depth and relate the responses to their current workexperiences. After receiving the written responses, we will conduct a follow-up interview withthe participants to elaborate on their written responses to generate as much detail as possible ontheir NOE views. All NOE items will be used in conjunction with individual follow-upinterviews with
in this area,E=Has serious deficiencies in this area which are detrimental to students. Four factors were identified which had the potential to show improvement of satisfactionscores due to the course redesign. The noted factors of the EOC survey instrument were:Response 12 (TP): the lectures were well organized, stimulating and up to dateResponse 13 (TP): the objectives of the course were clearly stated and explained during the lecturesResponse 15 (CP): the supplemental material was adequately detailed and positively contributed to the learning experienceResponse 18 (CP): the scope of the material covered in the lectures was reasonable in the amount and reflected high standards
model, numerous learning style models have beenproposed such as those found in [10], [11], and [12]. All models classify students according toscales that are defined based on the way learners receive and process information. The FSLMincorporates some elements of the Myers-Briggs [12] model and Kolb’s [11] experientiallearning model. The main reasoning for its selection in the DLMS evaluation is that it focuses onaspects of learning that are significant in engineering education.The FSLM consists of four dimensions, each with two contrasting learning styles. These fourdimensions (and their associated contrasting learning styles) are: Processing (Active/Reflective);Perception (Sensing/Intuitive); Input (Visual/Verbal); and Understanding
diverse resources, libraries can also provide materials for diversityworkshops offered to employees, which is also a form of direct support because the selection ofculturally diverse material aims to shape collective understanding of diversity and inclusion.Libraries can generate quantitative data to demonstrate support for teaching and research.Collection DevelopmentPerhaps the most important issue here is whether the collection development policies andpractices reflect the strategic (research, teaching, community development) goals of theuniversity. Both public and academic libraries have been adding language about diversity, whichmay conflict with cultural and political motivation to exclude some resources in some areasspecifically with
the teachers and theuniversity students related to engineering habits of mind, awareness of engineering as aprofessional field, and development of self-efficacy related to engineering topics.Data Collected: Consistent with a mixed methods approach [28], we collected multiple sources ofdata to evaluate our RET program, including a STEM teaching efficacy instrument, video andobservation of classroom lessons, engineering-based lesson plans, laboratory notebooks, and anend-of-summer reflection survey.STEM teaching and learning outcomes were measured by the MISO T-STEM instrument, whichwas intended to characterize participant attitudes on entering the program and identify areas ofgrowth due to program participation. The T-STEM (Teacher Efficacy
. One of the degree plans is housed in a traditional engineering department whereidentity formation is implicit (i.e., our control group), and one is a non-traditional engineeringdegree plan where identity development is explicit. Therefore, before describing the researchmethods used to assess engineering identity development of students in both departments, whatfollows is a summary of how the departments implicitly and explicitly attempt to developengineering identity, particularly in the non-traditional department.Engineering identity development in the non-traditional department is scaffolded across a rangeof activities, from project-based learning and reflection to the deliberate study of other identities,such as entrepreneur and leader. By
uploading an artifact, selecting acategory, writing a description, listing skills, tagging teammates, and creating a hashtag. Eachstudent in the REU Program created ten posts during the ten-week program. They documentedresearch deliverables, professional and technical sessions, field trips, conferences, or anyexperience that helped them grow professionally.The purposes of e-portfolios were for developmental (learning/reflection), showcase(professional/career), assessment (summative), and institutional (academic) purposes [6]. TheREU Program focused on the developmental and showcase uses. For developmental purposes,their e-portfolios promoted transferable skills, lifelong learning, and reflective thinking [7]. Asone student shared, “The
importance of understanding the career preparation process, researchersshould endeavor to develop knowledge that reflects the lived experiences of individuals makingdecisions about their future careers.In engineering education, two gaps in the literature currently limit the extent to which careerresearch reflects individuals’ lived experiences. First, existing studies in engineering educationresearch often make assumptions of what “counts” as an engineering career. Typically, onlypositions in industry or academia in engineering sectors are counted towards retention. Second,studies often treat career decision-making as a logical, cognitive process, ignoring the pervasiveinfluences of personal identities and belonging. The proposed study has
other industries. The data does notdifferentiate the type of incidents that contribute to the injury rate. A low overall injury rate doesnot necessarily correlate to the degree of lab safety since some injuries will be unrelated to labwork. Actual injury rate is likely higher than the data shows because it only includes reportedinjuries above a certain threshold. The BLS tracks causes of days away of work by industry, butit groups education with health services, which is the industry with the highest injury rate.Therefore, no analysis was done on whether the types of injuries at universities could reflect labaccidents.Generally, city governments are responsible for building and fire safety. Other alternative safetymonitors are found at the
grounded in the work of Crismond and Adams [94], who developed the InformedDesign Teaching and Learning Matrix based on a meta-literature review. The matrix includesnine design strategies that are fundamental to informed engineering design and include:understanding the challenge, building knowledge, generating ideas, representing ideas, weighingoptions and making decisions, conducting experiments, troubleshooting, revising or iterating,and reflecting on the process. In addition to identifying these strategies, the authors describelearning progressions to highlight the range of design behaviors that develop from beginningdesigners to informed designers.The design strategies in the Informed Design Teaching and Learning Matrix are intended to beused
like the nineties and in December drop.” (Student TH3_7) SD- The student has a sequential explanation “Well I change the roof a lot because it was, the way that can be across different disciplines. it works, at first, I had the roof panels on the wrong However, there is no evidence she/he side of the house, and then I had to move them that considered concepts from other disciplines around a bit. I also tried to make it (the roof) flatter during their trade-off decisions. and other roof designs to see the way the sun reflected more
conducted for two summers in Australia, and application of practices and ratingsystems in that country were used to develop projects that could be certified through the LEED(Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) rating system in the U.S. Several offerings ofa traditional on-campus course were then made, with a similar project development aspect at theconclusion of each. The learning outcomes from each type of offering are compared usingsimilar assessments, and an evaluation of the differences is made. Besides considering thebenefits of study abroad programs in sustainability education, a reflection on the benefits ofbringing an understanding of the global aspects of sustainability to on-campus course offerings isalso
formulation and development.Evaluation: Each topic was aligned with a laboratory assignment, problem identification, group(2-4) oral presentation, and a final project deliverable.Module 2: Weeks 3-4, United Nations SDG-4 Quality of EducationThe second module focused on the integration of vectors, geometry, trigonometry, andexperimentation for analysis of scientific phenomena and engineering systems, addressing UNSDG-4 Quality of Education.Specific objectives of this moduleStudents will learn to apply mathematical concepts to determine: (i) forces and stresses in staticsystems comprising linear elements, (ii) reflection and refraction of light from plane interfaces,and (iii) current in a simple circuit. Students will also learn to take measurements
they have the interview with the professor.The interview with the professor involves a dialogue tree that allows the participant to choosehow they wish to respond in real-time in the conversation. This ability, coupled with theparticipant having Becky’s vantage and mirrored body movements, enables participants to feelmore immersed as the actual character. Although the evolution of conversation is dependentupon the selections of the participant, there are key statements made by the professor that areindependent of the participant’s response. These statements reflect what is constant in allinteractions. Specifically, all constants in the dialogue involve at least one of the followingconcepts—(P)rejudice, (R)acism, (I)mplicit bias, (S)exism, (M
currently involved in their thirdacademic year of implementation. During this time, Cohort 1 faculty were introduced to: (1) thePrinciples of Teaching and Learning [3] as a framework for thinking about and guiding changesin their practice; (2) Teaching as Research as a strategy to effect changes in their courses andassess the impact [4]; and (3) a Community of Practice to share and reflect on their efforts tochange practices. Workshops with experts in the field on active learning, deep and transferablelearning, and cross-course connections were supplemented with research on how people learn [5,6] and discipline-based education research.The extent of participating faculty and classroom transformation is being examined through thelens of limiting
through a Service LearningProject (SLP). This existing community- oriented outreach activity, which is run through theUniversity of Illinois at Chicago, not only provides students with a sense of pride and belongingthrough their efforts during the event, but this event also has a reflection component to allowScholars to deeply connect with themselves and the community. At the end of each semester,Scholars will present their service learning project experience to their fellow Scholars, peers, andfaculty during a Scholar appreciation event. Professional Development Seminars. During the spring semester of their third year, S-STEM Scholars will enroll in the first course of a two-course sequence on ProfessionalDevelopment, 499.1. This course
would help focus students on seeing themselves as engineers andhave their ideas, rather than the LEGO bricks, drive the creation of the scene. We also added abrief time at the end of the activity to talk about what an engineer is and does, the variety ofscenes created and how that reflects the variety of engineers, and how students’ interests can fitwith the many different types of engineers. This shift moved the activity more into the realm ofan intervention rather than just data collection alone. The revised version of the activity was usedin the remaining nine classrooms. When they completed their scene, we encouraged students tocreate a brief video using a GoPro camera to describe what their engineer was doing. However,time constraints
join a small committee of teachersworking to redesign the science curriculum resources for the city.Data Collection and AnalysisTo track the evolution of Vanessa and Dani’s choices for teaching engineering, we invited bothto be interviewed periodically as they implemented engineering units, which ranged in lengthfrom one class session to several months. The first author conducted three interviews withVanessa and five with Dani, using the same protocol each time. Each interview began with theteacher describing her most recent units, often with pictures of student work and binders oflesson plans. The second part of each interview asked teachers to explain their instructional andpedagogical choices, reflect on why they persisted in teaching