protocols.AcknowledgementsThis research was supported in part by the U.S. National Science Foundation under the award#DMR 1305694. REG thanks the financial support from National Science Foundation CMMI0856491. Page 24.582.12References1 Lee, C. B., Jonassen, D. & Teo, T. The role of model building in problem solving and conceptual change. Interactive Learning Environments 19, 247-265 (2011).2 Stratford, S. J., Krajcik, J. & Soloway, E. Secondary students' dynamic modeling processes: Analyzing, reasoning about, synthesizing, and testing models of stream ecosystems. Journal of Science Education and Technology 7, 215-234 (1998).3 Smith, C
. Page 22.1563.2 Figure 1: Sanders’ map of design research5,6, with the “Design-Led / Research-Led” axis and the “Expert Mindset / ParticipatoryMindset” axis.Mosborg et al.’s studied the conceptions of design of practicing engineers8 by surveying andinterviewing 19 advanced practicing professionals from a range of engineering disciplines(mechanical, electrical, civil, industrial, materials science, systems engineers) about theirconception of design and design processes. In this study, the researchers asked the engineers to“create a picture or representation of what you think the process of design is.” They also askedthe practicing engineers to rate the six most and least important skills from a list of 23 skills.Finally, they asked the
might not account for structural nuances intransfer student pathways.Figure 1. Example calculation of course cruciality using the blocking factor and delay factorTo provide grounding for what kind of values to expect from structural complexity, Table 1presents a series of examples that increase in interconnectedness. Empirical values of curricularcomplexity for four-year programs from 63 schools ranged between ~50 and ~500 with anaverage of 273.6 in Heileman et al.’s program quality study [3]. Within institution variation isalso notable; the range was 191-618 in a study by Grote et al. at Virginia Tech [6]. Note that themetric depends on the number of courses in the plan of study, so comparisons using the rawmeasure between plans of study with
in IEEE Transactions in Professional Communication, the Nell Ann Pickett Award for best article in Technical Communication Quarterly, and the NCTE Best Article in Theories of Technical Communication (in both 2015 and 2018). She is also the co-founder of Women in Technical Communication, a mentoring organization that received the 2015 Diana Award from ACM Special Interest Group in the Design of Communication.Dr. Nathan R. Johnson, University of South FloridaDr. Fernando S´anchez, University of St. ThomasRev. Walter R. Hargrove American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021The Politics of Citation Practices in Engineering Education: A CitationNetwork Analysis
“Provideoptions for Perception” item in the “Provide multiple means of Representation” category becauseit offers a new way to “customize the display of information” by enabling students to search andgather information they need. UDL Guideline UDL Guideline item(s) ClassTranscribe Feature Provide multiple means Minimize threats and - Distraction/stress-free learning of Engagement distractions interface Provide options for - Student personal usage analytic Sustaining Effort & reports based on interaction with Persistence the platform Provide multiple means
; Overcoming Resistance to Cooperative Learning,” Coll. Teach., vol. 58, no. 2, pp. 52–57, Mar. 2010, doi: 10.1080/87567550903418594.[2] J. M. Langer-Osuna, “How Brianna Became Bossy and Kofi Came Out Smart: Understanding the Trajectories of Identity and Engagement for Two Group Leaders in a Project-Based Mathematics Classroom,” Can. J. Sci. Math. Technol. Educ., vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 207–225, Jul. 2011, doi: 10.1080/14926156.2011.595881.[3] N. Dasgupta, M. M. Scircle, and M. Hunsinger, “Female peers in small work groups enhance women’s motivation, verbal participation, and career aspirations in engineering,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., vol. 112, no. 16, pp. 4988–4993, Apr. 2015, doi: 10.1073/pnas.1422822112.[4] C. L. Colbeck, S. E
[1] President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, “Engage to excel: Producing one million additional college graduates with degrees in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics,” Science (80-. )., vol. 2, p. 130, 2012.[2] B. E. . 1960- Lovitts, Leaving the ivory tower : the causes and consequences of departure from doctoral study. Lanham : Rowman & Littlefield, 2001.[3] R. Sowell, J. Allum, and H. Okahana, Doctoral initiative on minority attrition and completion. Washington, DC, 2015.[4] A. Godwin, “The Development of a Measure of Engineering Identity,” 123rd Am. Soc. Eng. Educ. Annu. Conf. Expo., p. 15, 2016.[5] J. C. Hilpert, J. Husman, G. S. Stump, W. Kim, W. T. Chung
. W., & Osipow, S. H. (1966). Vocational certainty and indecision incollege freshmen. Personnel & Guidance Journal, 44(10), 1037-1041.Atadero, R. A., Rambo‐Hernandez, K. E., & Balgopal, M. M. (2015). Using social cognitivecareer theory to assess student outcomes of group design projects in statics. Journal ofEngineering Education, 104(1), 55-73.Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory.Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Betz, N. E., & Voyten, K. K. (1997). Efficacy and outcome expectations
otherpopulations and critical time periods. 12 ReferencesBabapour Chafi, M., Rahe, U., & Pedgley, O. (2012). The Influence of Self-reflective Diaries on Students’ Design Processes. In DesignEd Asia Conference 2012.Bauer, T. N., & Erdogan, B. (2012). Organizational socialization outcomes: Now and into the future. The Oxford Handbook of Organizational Socialization, 97–112.Boud, D. (2001). Using journal writing to enhance reflective practice. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 2001(90), 9–18.Brunhaver, S., Gilmartin, S. K., Grau, M. M., Sheppard, S., & Chen, H. L. (2013). Not all the same: A look at early career engineers
):113-125.13. Lens W, Simons J, Dewitte S. Student Motivation and Self-Regulation as a Function of Future Time Perspective and Perceived Instrumentality. In: Volet S, Jarvela S, eds. Motivation in Learning Contexts: Theoretical Advances and Methodological Implications. Pergamon; 2001:233-248.14. Lens W, Simons J, Dewitte S. From Duty to Desire: The Role of Students’ Future Time Perspective and Instrumentality Perceptions for Study Motivation and Self-Regulation. In: Pajares F, Urdan T, eds. Academic Motivation of Adolescents. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing; 2002:221-241.15. Kirn AN. The Influences of Engineering Student Motivation on Short-Term Tasks and Long-Term Goals. 2014;(May).16. Benson L, Kirn
students in University College Dublin,”Proceedings of the 2010 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference &Exposition, Louisville, Kentucky, U.S.A., June 20-23, 2010.[4] W. M. Clark, D. DiBiasio, and A. G. Dixon, “A project-based, spiral curriculum forintroductory courses in ChE: Part 1. Curriculum design,” Chemical Engineering Education,34(3), pp. 222-233, 2000.[5] K. F. Trenshaw, M. Miletic, J. W. Schlude, A. S. Tillman, T. J. Vogel, J. A. Henderson, andE. G. Seebauer, “Chemical Engineering Design Projects Across the Curriculum at a LargeResearch-Intensive Public University,” International Journal of Engineering Education, 31(5),1352-1375, 2015.[6] K.Trenshaw, J. Henderson, M. Miletic, E. Seebauer, A.Tillman, and T. Vogel
, Boulder Daria Kotys-Schwartz is the Faculty Director for the Mesa State College-University of Colorado Mechan- ical Engineering Partnership program and an instructor in the Department of Mechanical Engineering at the University of Colorado, Boulder. She received B.S. and M..S degrees in mechanical engineering from the Ohio State University and a Ph.D. in mechanical rngineering from the University of Colorado, Boul- der. Kotys-Schwartz has focused her research in engineering epistemology, engineering student learning, retention, and diversity. She is currently investigating the use of oral discourse method for conceptual development in engineering, the impact of a four-year hands-on design curriculum in engineering, the
underrepresentation of white women and people of color inengineering undergraduate education are diverse, yet follow common patterns: many attempt toprovide undergraduates with tools for better negotiation of institutions by decreasing bias,increasing access, and improving fairness. An examination of recent summaries of work ongender and race helps reveal these patterns.AAUW (formerly the American Association for University Women)’s recent summary of criticalresearch10 on gender in STEM disciplines describes six common types of research: 1)examinations of gender-based theories of intelligence and how promotion of a “growth mindset”over a “fixed mindset” can help “protect” (p. 33) girls and women from various forms ofstereotype; 2) examinations of stereotype
students whowere new to PSVT performed better, though the difference was not significant (p = 0.698 basedon the Welch two sample t-test). However, there was a significant difference (p=0.007) in theaverage time spent solving each PSVT problem for participants who were previously exposed toPSVT (M=24.6 s, SD =4.1 s) and those who were not (M=39.8 s, SD=13.1 s). Although studentsnew to PSVT spent more time in the solving process, further analysis showed there was nocorrelation between performance and time spent on PSVT problems (Pearson correlationcoefficient ( ) ).Within the current sample, there was no significant difference (p=0.314) in average PSVTperformance between male participants (M=71.4%, SD=24%), and female
conversations are generated in class having laid out basic knowledge and any doubts generated are solved in class." (S14) "I think they serve to lay the groundwork for the subject that is going to be further discussed in class and thus, once in the class itself, one better understands the concepts and subject matter." (S36)Students' perception of the "Flipped Classroom + Podcasts" instructional practiceThe responses obtained from the “Student Response to Instructional Practices” (StRIP)questionnaire were compiled in spreadsheets and analyzed using the Excel statistical modules.The StRIP was sent by email to students at semester´s end, obtaining 26 responses out of the 53student total.Given the interest in analyzing student
Scope of interventionEuropean Journal of Engineering Education 6 Engineering education 21Computer Applications in Engineering Education 3 Computer Science 7International Journal of Engineering Education 3 K-12 engineering 6IEEE Transactions on Education 2 34Journal of Engineering Education 2 Location of the authors'Journal of Systems and Software 2 institution(s)Advances in Engineering Education
virtual summer seminar. This seminar was moderated byAditya Johri, one of the editors of the Cambridge Handbook of Engineering Education Research(CHEER). In this series of 15 seminars, 32 CHEER authors engaged in a one-hour discussionwith Johri to elicit their current views on the topics highlighted in their chapters. As part of theintroduction to each seminar, Dr. Johri asked the author(s) how they entered the field of EER.The findings from the analysis of this secondary data are used to develop a framework to helpanswer the research question: How did current engineering education researchers enter thefield? This is the first step in our major research goal, which aims to investigate what institutionscan do to attract and retain EER
. 2016-June, 2016.[16] N. A. Mamaril, E. L. Usher, C. R. Li, D. R. Economy, and M. S. Kennedy, “Measuring Undergraduate Students’ Engineering Self-Efficacy: A Validation Study,” J. Eng. Educ., vol. 105, no. 2, pp. 366–395, 2016.[17] S. R. Porter and M. E. Whitcomb, “Non-response in student surveys: The role of demographics, engagement and personality,” Res. High. Educ., vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 127– 152, 2005.[18] C. A. Lundberg, L. A. Schreiner, K. Hovaguimian, and S. Slavin Miller, “First-Generation Status and Student Race / Ethnicity as Distinct Predictors of Student Involvement and Learning,” NASPA J., vol. 44, no. 1, p. 57, 2007.[19] M. C. Manley Lima, “Commuter Students’ Social Integration : The Relationship
study overall is to facilitate students’ abilities to communicate their researcheffectively and more easily decipher the discourse expectations of academic engineering ingraduate school. AcknowledgmentsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant1733594. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this materialare those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National ScienceFoundation. References[1] B. Yalvac, H. D. Smith, J. B. Troy, and P. Hirsch, “Promoting advanced writing skills in an upper- level engineering class,” Journal of Engineering Education
content and kids. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 2006.[3] T. A. Angelo, and K. P. Cross, Classroom Assessment Techniques: A Handbook for College Teachers. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1993.[4] R. Glaser, (1963). “Instructional technology and the measurement of learning outcomes: Some questions,” American Psychologist, vol. 8, no. 8, 519–521.[5] E. Lee, A., Carberry, H. A., Diefes-Dux, and S. Atwood, “Faculty perception before, during, and after implementation of standards-based grading,” Australian Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 53-61, 2018.[6] H. A. Diefes-Dux and L. M. Cruz Castro, “Student reflection to improve access to standards
for the future. F1 Please describe your plans over the next 5 years. What would you want to do after you complete your dual degree program? F2 Are you interested in pursing any additional graduate degrees in the future? Please list all the fields and degree programs of interest. a Anticipated Graduate Program(s): b Anticipated Graduate Degree(s): c Anticipated Start Date(s):Students could select to receive this questionnaire in electronic or hard-copy form. From thesecompleted questionnaires, one student who had not been identified through the final survey andinterviews, told us of plans
. Markman (Eds.), Carmichael’s manual of child Page 14.907.21 psychology (Vol 1, pp.77-166). New York: Wiley.6. Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18, 32-42.7. Carlson, E.R. (1997). Experienced cognition. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.8. Cohen, M.S., Freeman, J.T., & Wolf, S. (1996). Metacognition in time-stressed decision making: Recognizing, critiquing, and correcting. Human Factors, 38(2), 206-219.9. Collins, A, Brown, J. S., & Newman, (1989). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching students the craft of reading, writing, and
papers, including anexamination of relevant background information and author biographies, also suggests thatcollaborations frequently grow out of pre-existing individual and institutional relationships. Forexample, researchers who move to another country may continue to collaborate and publish withpeers and partners at their former institution(s). In other cases, cross-national collaborationsinvolve visiting professorships, post-doc appointments, Fulbright exchanges, and advisee-studentrelationships that cross national boundaries. International initiatives undertaken by universities,including partnerships with foreign institutions, also seem to encourage research collaborations.Keyword and Category AnalysisFigure 1 presents total number of
R. R.Cocking, editors, How People Learn: Brain, Mind,Experience, and School: Expanded Edition. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press,2000. [Online]. Available: https://www.nap.edu/catalog/9853/how-people-learn-brain-mind-experience-and-school-expanded-edition[4] K. Rayner, “Eye movements and attention in reading, scene perception, and visualsearch,” The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, vol. 62, no. 8, pp. 1457–1506,2009. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1080/17470210902816461[5] M. Hegarty, Multimedia learning and the development of mental models. Cam- bridge:Cambridge University Press, 2014, p. 673–702.[6] A. M. Madsen, A. M. Larson, L. C. Loschky, and N. S. Rebello, “Differences in visualattention
appointment of five lead engineers to serve as project mentors for theprogram. These project mentors selected ten community college students from a shortlist of 20candidates provided by two members of the RU team (lead principal investigator and graduatestudent researcher) who conducted 34 interviews from an original pool of 58 applicants. Originalapplicants represented a range of individual differences: 26% female, 55% underrepresentedethnic minorities; 57% first generation; 27% veterans; 62% low-income; 5% students with1This research was supported by, or in part by, the U. S. Office of Naval Research under awardnumber N00014-15-1-2438.disabilities2. The final selection of ten from this diverse pool echoed such diversity: two females,five minorities