each year were surveyed. Participants were also asked for their CEE preferencessuch as which types of courses (technical, management, EH&S, legal, other) they would prefermore of and what was their preferred delivery format (face to face, hybrid, online). Thisinformation should be invaluable to those developing curricula and designing and deliveringcontinuing professional development for engineers.IntroductionThe need for CEE has been well-documented [1]. Continuing education is critical for workingengineers because of the breadth of processes and equipment they design and use and because ofrapid changes in technology [2]. For example, plant engineers take courses to learn how tooperate different types of equipment specific to their
scenarioscan and do create spaces for workplace learning. Moreover, the examples they provided arelargely idealized and do not account for the full range of experiences newcomer engineersencounter. Thus, analysis included working recursively through the data, literature, and examplesto develop operational definitions of each variable. We deconstructed the examples provided byJacobs and Park (2009) to develop functional criteria that could be applied to journal entries todetermine the location, structure, and role of facilitator(s) within each entry, as described below.Determining location of learningJacobs and Park (2009) define on-the-job as learning that occurs “near or at the actual worksetting,” but also emphasize experienced-based learning in on
reuse. These lessons can guide professionaldevelopments for not only K-12 teachers, but also for engineering educators in cybersecurity andcomputer science.Funding:This work was supported by the Wyoming Department of Education (WDE) and theNational Science Foundation (NSF) through the CS for All: RPP - Booting Up ComputerScience in Wyoming (WySLICE Award #1923542) and Sustaining Wyoming’s AdvancingReach in Mathematics and Science (SWARMS Award #1339853). Any opinions, findings, andconclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do notnecessarily reflect the views of NSF.ASEE 2021 ReferencesAbramovich, S. (2016). Understanding digital badges in higher education
parents have not completed their H.S. education. Childs participation in some college, when parent(s) have a bachelor’s degree or more is 87%. Childs participation in some college, when parent(s) did not complete High School is 47%.The Winds of ChangeThe winds of change are blowing the sands of time through the pages of history; as the sayinggoes. We are standing at the precipice of seismic shifts in national and international highereducation and public institutions of higher education in particular. The U.S. economy is stuck inneutral since the last recession [8, p.1], tuition prices are skyrocketing, student loan debt hassurpassed $1.5 trillion [15, p. 1], parents – who have leveraged their homes through equity loansand second
inenvironmental engineering, transportation engineering and physics department. The entire STEMtrainees reported that the analog devices used during the training session engaged and made themcurious fully in exploring and performing the experiments. The ECP team members became moreconfident in guiding their students to conduct home-based hands-on lab experiment safely andeffectively.AcknowledgementsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No.1915614. The opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed are those of theauthor(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. References1. Despain, M. (2020). What does effective virtual training look like? Find
faculty members in the Department wanted to follow suit, and began their search for theright type of practitioners, to enrich the academic process by bringing the practice into the classroom. After Foundation Engineering was over, and the final course grade was out, a“questionnaire” was sent to those who enrolled in the class seeking their opinions, evaluations,and any comment(s) they may wish to offer. Twenty six out of a total of 30 students returned the“questionnaire” on time! The opinions expressed and comments made were, by and large,positive to say the least. After regrouping, and rephrasing to correct the English language; thecomments offered by the ex- students, could be summarized as follows: The adjunct was easy to approach
. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021 Demographic Leadership –A First of its Kind Diversity Leadership Online Course in a Tier-1 University Doctorate Degree ProgramAbstractThis first course in a professional doctorate degree program called the Doctorate of Technology(DTECH) on demographic leadership at a tier 1 university was premised on years of research,practice, and scholarship. The scholarship was conducted by asking the question “Why don’tyou like me?”“Why don’t you like me?” as a research question, is not about the author(s) individually, butabout each of us as individuals. It is about all of us. The question is really “why don’t
', Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 11 (2004), 247-72.8 Ruth Deakin Crick, and Guoxing Yu, 'Assessing Learning Dispositions: Is the Effective Lifelong Learning Inventory Valid and Reliable as a Measurement Tool?', Educational Research, 50 (2008), 387-402.9 S. M. Lord, J. C. Chen, K. J. McGaughey, and V. W. Chang, 'Measuring Propensity for Lifelong Learning: Comparing Chinese and U.S. Engineering Students', in Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), 2013 IEEE (2013), pp. 329-34.10 John C Chen, Karen McGaughey, and Susan M Lord, 'Measuring Students' Propensity for Lifelong Learning', in Profession of Engineering Education: Advancing Teaching, Research and Careers: 23rd
our experience, we believe that the online learning paradigm is conduciveto the 21st-centry education where creativity, critical thinking, communication and collaborationare encouraged.References1. S. Patrick, “E-Learning: A Federal Perspective”, U.S. Department of Education, (www.nutn.org/susan_patrick.pdf).2. J. Bourne, D. Harris, F. Mayadas, “Online Engineering Education: Learning Anywhere, Anytime”, Journal of Asynchronous Learning Network, 9(1), pp. 15-41 (2005).3. A. F. Mayadas, “What is ALN?” (http://www.aln.org.alnweb.aln.htm).4. L. Palma, R. F. Morrison, P. N. Enjeti, J W. Howze ,“Use of Web-Based Materials to Teach Electric Circuit Theory,, IEEE Transactions on Education, 48 (4) November 2006.5
Research Center. January 31. Retrieved from http://www.pewresearch.org/fact- tank/2018/01/31/more-adults-now-share-their-living-space-driven-in-part-by-parents-living-with-their-adult- children/[2] Dimock, M. (2019). Defining Generations: Where Millennials End and Generation Z Begins. Pew Research Center. January 17, 2019.[3] Smith, C., Turner, S. (2016). The Radical Transformation of Diversity and Inclusion: The Millennial Influence. Deloitte University, The Leadership Center for Inclusion. Downloaded from https://www2.deloitte.com/us/en/pages/about-deloitte/articles/radical-transformation-of-diversity-and- inclusion.html.[4] Keathley, J., Merrill, P., Owens, T., & Meggarrey, I. (2013). “The Executive Guide to Innovation
education research and the learning sciences, Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 100, No. 1, pp. 151-185, 2011.4. S. Galloway, The professional body and continuing professional development: New directions in engineering, Innovations in Education and Training International, Vol. 35, No. 3, pp. 231-240, 1998.5. National Academy of Engineering, Educating the Engineer of 2020: Adapting Engineering Education to the New Century, The National Academies Press, Washington, DC, retrieved from http://www.nae.edu/Publications/Reports/25677.aspx, 2005.6. M.H. McCaulley, E.S. Godleski, C.F. Yokomoto, L. Harrisberger, and E.D. Sloan, Applications of psychological type in engineering education, Engineering Education, Vol. 73
,and employing good listening skills, faculty can effectively navigate a variety of career situationsto arrive at a mutually beneficial end.AcknowledgmentsThe authors would like to acknowledge the review committee for the Women in EngineeringDivision, which encouraged them to formalize the panel discussion into a paper focused onacademic negotiation.References 1. Fisher, R., Ury, W. and Patton, B. (2012). Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In. Third Ed., London: Random House 2. Harvard Business Essentials: Negotiation, 2003. 3. Kolb, D.M., Williams, J. (2003) Everyday Negotiation, Navigating the Hidden Agendas in Bargaining, Jossey-Bass. 4. Babcock, L., and Laschever, S., (2003). Women Don’t Ask