contribute to students’ stress andanxiety, and have been shown to impact achievement and retention. This study uses ethnographicmethods to investigate how expectations are socially constructed in engineering programs andhow students’ come to internalize these expectations. Data was collected in ten focus groupswith a total of 38 participants at two universities with different institutional characteristics. Thequalitative analysis drew on constant comparative methods and proceeded from topic coding ofsources of expectations to interpretive coding of mechanisms in which students internalizedexperiences. More specifically, sources of expectations were identified as academics, superiors,peers, extra-curricular, and from outside the major. The rich
HyperactivityDisorder (ADHD) possess significant creative and risk-taking potential, they have remainedhighly underrepresented in engineering programs. Past studies have indicated that students withADHD have an extremely high risk of academic failure and dropout, and are more than twice aslikely than their peers without ADHD to leave university. Traditional engineering programs arefailing to attract and retain neurodiverse learners, and thus do not benefit from these students’high potential for creative thinking. The disconnect between the traditional educationenvironment and the abilities of students with ADHD is not unique to higher education. In fact,high school students with ADHD have significantly lower GPAs and are over eight times morelikely to drop out
standards, financial management, business conduct, leadership,communication, etc…. Early in the semester, the students were asked to update, peer review, andsubmit copies of their resume as an assignment. Under the auspices of “another resume exercise,”in opening to a lecture on diversity and inclusion, the author provided each student in attendanceone of two resumes. The resumes, provided in Appendices A & B, were developed to reflectexperiences familiar to students at the author’s institution, and were identical with the exceptionof utilizing a traditionally female vice traditionally male first name. The resumes were distributedto students in attendance randomly. Students were given approximately 5-10 minutes to reviewthe resume then, using
students without early exposure to real-worldapplications of their major, that give positive insight into potential careers, do not always connectwith upper-classmen to use as successful peer role models. This research has shown that accessto peer role models increases academic persistence [1], [2]. It has also been shown that retentionof URM and women is increased through project-based learning or experiential learningpedagogies and techniques[3]-[9].Moreover, URM students often have a limited perspective of their contributions to improvingtechnology due to social issues such as a lack of exposure to engineering and science professionsand having personal role models in their local community who are scientists or engineers.Furthermore, when URM
exam. As there is no BAEN specific exam, the‘Other Disciplines’ exam is used here as a stand in; however, BAEN students have been knownto excel at other FE discipline exams [12].Results The 10 Learning Outcome (LO) areas identified were: 1. Engineering Core + Foundation: 4. Professional and Technical as defined above Writing/Communication 2. System Design Theory and 5. Macro- and Microbiology, Practice: defining structure, Physiology architecture, and data of a system 6. Economics and Optimization to satisfy specified requirements 7. Electronics
errors and to give suggestions for future work or implementation.4) Assignment #4 (25%): In-class Presentation. Note: the students were asked to grade their peers’ presentations both on content and on delivery. The final grade was the average of the grades given by the faculty and peers’ average. o ParticipantsThe initial cohort, fall 2019, comprise of 30 MET seniors. o Data CollectionThe students’ end of course evaluation comments, two questionnaires, and project performanceand project presentation grades were used to assess the learning outcomes. The students’experience and perceptions regarding the new project were gauged with: Questionnaire #1 (Fig.1) which focused on information literacy, especially the students’ experience
[2]. In addition, different strategies were developed to recruit andretain students in the STEM education [4-5]. Creating quality, attractive STEM programs [6] andusing peer influence to motivate high school girls into the STEM fields [7-8] appears to beeffective ways to retain female students in STEM.Since 2016 our university has developed a program "RAMP for High School Girls" to exposejunior and senior high school girls to STEM fields. In the past 4 years, about 30 female studentsparticipated in the program each year. This year our university started a new STEM program forfreshman and sophomore female high school students from a girls’ high school. This programaimed to help female high school students explore STEM fields. Therefore, the
autoethnographies on female faculty in academia are limited [2, 11]. This researchgathered autoethnographic stories from three female faculty members in engineering, the authorsof this paper, who had also experienced gender bias in their teaching. This was then organizedinto a ”collective autoethnography”. The analysis and writing-up of the project were alsocompleted by the authors. According to Ellis’s autoethnographic principles [8], stories are centralto this paper. The literature presented and the emotions evoked after the stories are told is all doneto change the understanding of what it means to be a female instructor in the engineeringclassroom.The three authors of this paper are early-career faculty in small teaching-focused institutions.Two of the
environment (called Freeform) employed in Statics was developed withinthe context of Dynamics courses offered at PWUL to combine best practices from active learning,blended learning, and collaborative learning research [11], [12]. The environment itself revolvesaround a “lecturebook” that serves as both a textbook and a notebook for the students. Thecurriculum proceeds through the sequential chapters of the lecturebook with students writing theirpersonal notes directly on the pages of the lecturebook itself. Instructors use example problemsfrom the lecturebook during class, and their students can look up videos showing the solutions tothese examples (including those not covered during in-class instruction) by going online to thecourse website
instructor feedback ofthose reflections in one of the engineering units that use LAs.The LA ProgramThe LA Program utilizes the three core elements suggested by the Learning Assistant Alliance(https://www.learningassistantalliance.org/). First, in the LA Pedagogy Seminar, LAs receivepedagogical development in in a formal class with their peers, generally in their first term as anLA. Second, LAs meet weekly with the instructor and the graduate teaching assistants as amember of the instructional team to prepare for active learning in class that week. While LAselsewhere are often used in large lecture sections, in the context of the unit studied, the LAsfacilitated learning in smaller studio or laboratory sessions (Koretsky, 2015; Koretsky et al
Map to a Rewarding Career, 4th ed, by Raymond Landis [2]). Professional development and engineering identity elements were enhanced in 2018 by the addition of Gallup Clifton StrengthsFinder [3], team-building activities, job search skills, interview skills training, resume design, and professional conduct before, during, and after industry visits. The 2018 project evaluation revealed that students rated these new PD components highly. All have been maintained and, in some cases, expanded for the 2019 program. c) Dedicated peer tutor: Each cohort has a dedicated tutor for calculus, statics, and spatial visualization (a component of the PD course). Since the program’s second year, the tutor has been a
visits eight specific countries and places that represent the cultures ofother faculty in the department. This provides students with some cultural context of the otherfaculty members and an opportunity to engage in conversation relative to engineering in theirplaces of origin.World Structures Reports and PresentationsAs part of the ESCALA certificate program, the author performed a Timed Observation Protocolfor Student Engagement and Equity (TOPSE) in the prerequisite Mechanics of Materials course[6]. In the lessons studied, the author noted that he does not regularly give students anopportunity to teach one another in class. Peer-to-peer instruction is a powerful tool; therefore,when incorporating the new culturally relevant pedagogy, the
,interactions between students and the instructor and among students are the norm.3.1 Cohort ConfigurationsThe Live Platform we use for instruction supports three fundamental configurations: • One classroom: This configuration, shown in Figure 1(a), connects the instructor with one classroom as described in [6]. In this configuration, the instructor can directly interact with the students in the classroom, and students in the classroom can interact with their peers. • Multiple classrooms: This configuration, shown in Figure 1(b), enables the instructor to interact with multiple classrooms at the same time. Each classroom perceives the instructor as dedicated to their location, but the instructor can monitor all
individualquestions were facilitated. The use of this system was initially designed to streamline the processof students writing their names on a whiteboard to get help. Although this worked for smallercourses, larger courses require more structure for office hours. The Queue allows course staff tomore effectively help students while collecting data about its users and the question they ask.With its continued use, the data collected provides powerful course analytics that could be usedto improve learning and the student experience.One benefit to the Queue system, compared to traditional office hours, is an increase in datacollected. Analyzing this data can provide insights into courses, such as what times might needmore course staff scheduled or what
President Moon of South Koreaasking them to choose five renewable energy sources that they think are most efficient and suitablefor the economic and geological context of South Korea. Students individually work to rank fivechoices for renewable energy and write reasons including important values they considered fortheir choice. Then they are grouped in a single-gender group (boys or girls) and asked to discusstheir individual ideas to move toward a collective decision about what kind of renewable energythey will recommend as a group.Phase two. In phase two, more information about renewable energy is given to the students in asingle-gender group. They individually read the information and discuss their decisions in light ofthe new information
factor loading issues. One item,“incorporating feedback,” cross-loaded on both factors.Table 2. Factor structure and factor loadings for skill sets Item Communication Research Skills Skills Oral presentation 0.793 Writing technical reports, conference proceedings, or journal 0.788 publications Creating visual displays such as posters or prototypes 0.714 Networking with industry 0.442 Networking with my peers
Paper ID #30819Program: Study DesignMs. Rebecca Balakrishnan, University of Manitoba I am a career development professional with 8 years of experience working with post-secondary students at University of Manitoba on all aspects of career exploration, planning and job search. This takes a variety of forms, including one-on-one appointments, facilitating workshops, and writing resources. Recently, as part of my Master of Education in Counselling Psychology thesis, I have collaborated with faculty in the Faculty of Engineering to integrate career development activities into the Biosystems Engineering curriculum.Dr
technical-writing coursecoordinator is recruited for the SO-3 (“communication”) committee, and the curricular-labfaculty are recruited for the SO-6 (“experimentation”) committee. Beyond this, faculty mayvolunteer for a specific SO committee based on personal interest or pedagogical expertise.Finally, for the “technical” student outcomes (SO-1, “engineering problem solving”; SO-2,“engineering design”; and SO-6, “experimentation”) the Assessment Coordinator recruits boththermal-systems and mechanical-systems faculty for each of the corresponding student-outcomecommittees. This is because the accreditation criteria specific to mechanical engineeringidentifies thermal and mechanical systems as the twin core topic areas for BS ME students.The Assessment
programs istoo low. Some reasons why students change majors after the first year include student weaknessesin mathematics and physical sciences; and educators not providing enough hands-on interactionrelated to their selected engineering major. To help rectify the situation, the authors have revampedthe Introductory Engineering course (EGR-101) to have more hands on “tinkering”, a designproject, and mandatory peer-lead study groups. Students received their own Arduino kits andaccessories, create Arduino-based measurement tools, and use them to conduct laboratoryexperiments where they measure various parameters such as temperature and voltage. Theseexperiments generate both steady-state and dynamic results that are analyzed and reported bystudents
Paper ID #31605Building Better Worlds: An Interdisciplinary Approach to EngineeringEthics PedagogyDr. Amy Schroeder, University of Southern California Dr. Amy Schroeder has been teaching communication in the Viterbi School of Engineering at the Uni- versity of Southern California for the past six years. She developed a new course focused on science, literature and ethics; it has become a consistently successful course in USC’s general education program. She holds a PhD in literature and creative writing from USC; her first book received the Field Prize and was published by Oberlin College Press. Her prose appears in the Los
lecture and lab are combined in one course setting) that meets for 110minute time blocks, 3 times per week, for 10 weeks. The course leads students throughdesigning a 32-bit RISC-V processor in SystemVerilog (a hardware description language) andteaches students how to write assembly and C code to run on their processors. We implementedthe diversity and inclusion activities in two sections of the same course (one section had 25students while the other had 30 students) taught by the same instructor.Getting Students to Know One AnotherThere exist many ‘ice-breaker’ techniques that can help students get to know one another [17].The technique we decided to use included weekly seat rotations (so that students would sit nextto different people each week
experience. Finally, thirteen percent (13%) of interviewees stated each of thefollowing as positive aspects of this teaching approach: 1) promotion of liveliness, engagement, orattentiveness during class, and 2) repetition or reinforcement of material, sometimes aiding memory orleading to clarification of difficult material. These results are in line with the significant difference in thelab report scores in the two classes. With more communication and interactivity, students were able to askspecific questions, communicate their interpretations, and receive feedback from instructor and peers. Thislikely helped them to write clear explanations and discussions of their results in the lab report. Table 4: Summary of Interview Responses
,performance, and value beliefs. A qualitative analysis showed that students mainly chose topursue a baccalaureate degree in engineering due to the financial reward, family influences,faculty support, and early childhood interest. Furthermore, students’ motivation to continue topursue an engineering degree was attributed to prestige, engineering experiences acquired,financial and academic support, faculty and peer support, and gain of engineering knowledgethroughout their academic journey.Implications of the study were: a) a set of small samples of data was analyzed, and b)examination of students belonging to a specific cohort. This cohort was provided with financialand academic support to navigate through their studies. Future studies could consist
course in industrial and systems engineering. DTSDcurriculum includes a series of idea generation exercises that the students completed individuallyor in teams. In each divergent thinking exercise, students were asked to generate multiple ideas fora given “problem” under a strict time constraint. After each exercise, a facilitated reflection sessionallowed for students to learn the idea generation approaches that were used by their peers. Weexamined the effectiveness of the DTSD module using two measures: (1) changes in self-perceptions of creative ability and mindsets and (2) reflections on the influence of DTSD training.Questionnaires containing the Short Scale of Creative Self and Creative and Fixed Mindsetmeasures were administered before
reading, listening, writing, and hearing about a concept, but also includes using these skills to tackle a challenging objective. As such, the course has both technical, as well as experiential learning objectives. The main technical objective included learning to apply engineering analysis and tools to the design and fabrication of working machines. Computer-Aided Design (CAD), basic shop tools, power and energy analysis, and free body diagrams were the main engineering tools focused on in the course. The experiential learning objectives included creativity, teamwork, persistence, and project management. It is important to achieve these learning objectives for all students regardless of their background, so inclusivity is also an
to jeopardize the credibility of theassessment.For a program that uses a senior seminar course to meet many of the ABET criteria, thatcourse could assist with this requirement as well. Students could be assigned to read abook or article on a complex project such as “The Great Bridge” or “The Path Betweenthe Seas” by David McCullough. The students could write an essay on the global,cultural, social, environmental and economic considerations of the Brooklyn Bridge orPanama Canal, respectively. Such books are filled with so many examples that no twostudents should arrive with the same answers.One challenge encountered with this requirement so far is distinguishing between thesocial and cultural considerations because many consider them
course involve technical communication, team writing, and analysis of thedata collected in lab. While creation of devices and collection of data occurred in the lab spaces,the rest of this work typically occurred outside of lab. As such, it is perhaps no surprise thatmoving from UOL to MIL had no statistically significant impact on student project scores. Whileteam projects were scored higher on average in MIL than in UOL, the p value was only 0.088.Furthermore, it may be worth noting that the same observations could be made for student peerevaluations of their team members. In the test course, students switch teams for each of their sixprojects and they tend to work with almost every peer in their section. Part of the score for theirteam
Fellows from each yearindicated that they would recommend the professional development to their peers. Table 5contains a few comments from each year as to why they would recommend it to their peers. Acommon theme was the how much was learned about they learned about the topics andacademia. Table 4. ACADEME Fellows perceptions of the quality of the professional development workshop % Strongly %Disagree %Agree % Strongly Disagree Agree Cohort year 17 18 19 17 18 19 17 18 19 17 18 19 Content was useful for my 0 8 0 0 4 0 20 0 26 80 88 74 professional
have external barriers to learning.Therein, focus tends to be on additional resource deployment or encouragement to perseverethrough challenge for specific students. However, not all strategies need focus exclusively on theindividual student; a powerful means to enhance a student’s academic interest and performanceis through the culture and environment of the classroom [7-8]. In fact, one could speculate thatindividual focus on particular students by an educator need be optimized, as social implicationscould have detriment to equitable goals. Therefore, this sum of interpersonal interactionsbetween students and the educator, in its optimal form, would allow for shared experience andachievement between students, spurring peer support and
/C&ME Course Leadership Crosswalk Course Course Objective Leadership Related Assignments Intro to Mech Operate as an effective • Deliverable #11: Team Charter Engineering (ME201) leader or team member • Deliverable #19: Peer Review on a project team. and Reflection Mechanical Operate as an effective • Team Charter Engineering Design leader or team member • Peer Review (ME404) in a multi-disciplinary project team Mechanical Systems Work effectively within a • Peer Review (x 2) Design (ME496) multidisciplinary design