, and mathematics(STEM)1. Initial findings from exploratory factor analysis are largely consistent with Yosso’sconceptual CCW framework but suggest some important ways in which the framework can befurther developed.IntroductionMuch of the research on educational inequality by race and ethnicity has taken a deficits-basedapproach, focusing on how students who are systemically marginalized based on racial andethnic status lack the resources valued by the dominant group that contribute to success ineducation, such as cultural capital [1]. While it is important to highlight stark racial and ethnicinequality that exists, this line of research tends to homogeneously characterize racially andethnically marginalized students as failing in the education
in thequalitative analysis and themes developed were 1) integration of education and design, 2) fivediscourses, and 3) advice for novices. In addition to the interview, two sample case studies focusingon curriculum design from the literature was examined to understand how well they map to the fivediscourses of design thinking. Studies were selected if they discussed curriculum design orevaluated the application of a new curriculum design. Two studies were selected, and keycomponents related to curriculum design or utilization was analyzed. The beliefs and opinions ofparticipants on integrating the discourses of design thinking in curriculum design are presentedalong with findings from the comparative case studies. Limitations and future
thoroughliterature review was conducted on makerspaces. Numerous attributes of makerspaces and makercommunities were then sorted into broader dimensions. These dimensions include physicalassets, culture, influence, and sustainability of a makerspace. The authors propose numerousindicators that could be utilized to quantify these makerspace dimensions. This assessmentframework will enable future researchers to look at holistic data and influencing factors,encouraging more structured investigations on the many impacts of makerspaces on theirmembers and community. Makerspaces are an unrivaled tool in hands-on experiential learning,and by creating a common framework, research on educational impacts can be shared amongpreviously disparate efforts.1. Introduction
goal of thiswork is to visualize and make meaning of CAIR-related assessment data. Our display design isinspired by concepts from the domain of human factors engineering. A low-fidelity conceptualdesign and walk-through of the display are provided and key scenarios and tasks the instructorcan achieve via using the display are explored. The display can inform the instructor on both thequality of the marking done by the assessor(s) and common problem-solving errors committedby the students across a problem, test, and so on.IntroductionMeeting the pedagogical goals of Constructive Alignment, Formative and outcomes-basedAssessment are deemed significant for learning [1]–[3]. Constructive Alignment promotes asocial negotiation and mapping between
and learning platforms. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021Design science in Engineering Education ResearchIntroductionDesign science, design research, design-based research, design science research, and designexperiments are terms used by different research communities to describe a somewhat similarprocess. In this inquiry process new knowledge is created through application of scientifictheories, and systematic design, as well as collecting evidence of the quality and results of thedesign process. Probably the most known articulation of this process was presented byHerbert Simon in his book The Sciences of the Artificial published for the first time in 1969[1
core ideas enumerated in the Next Generation ScienceStandards (NGSS). We next specify our process of refining the assessment from 17 items acrossthree separate item pools to a final total of three open-response items. We then provide evidencefor the validity and reliability of the assessment instrument from the standards of (1) content, (2)meaningfulness, (3) generalizability, and (4) instructional sensitivity.As part of the discussion from the standards of generalizability and instructional sensitivity, wedetail a study carried out in our partner school system in the fall of 2019. The instrument wasadministered to students in treatment (n= 201) and non-treatment (n = 246) groups, wherein theformer participated in a two-to-three-week, NGSS
-Based Learning, Workplace GenresIntroductionA critical component of the engineering curriculum (encompassing both engineering technologyand engineering programs), beyond equipping students with technical proficiencies andknowledge of design processes, is the development of effective communication skills. Theimportance of communication is evident not only in the instructors’ own beliefs about thecentrality of communication for engineering students’ development [1] but also in theaccreditation standards for engineering; engineering accreditation organization ABET supportsand solidifies the teaching of effective communication through the accreditation board’s requiredlearning outcomes. Specifically, ABET requires that students in accredited
education landscape and culture, homework practiceshave evolved and online homework systems are increasingly used due to their potential inimproving students’ engagement, learning and performance [1], [2]. As such, we developed aset of prelab problems for the course SEE 310: Integrated Energy Solutions II, using theonline homework system, WeBWorK, with the goal to enhance student learning, and ensurethat students cannot copy directly from their peers. The prelab problems complement thecomputer-based lab sessions where students create and use energy systems models to deepentheir understanding of the models and related sustainability problems as part of their learningexperiences for the course. Consequently, we are interested to examine the impact of
participation in an engineering team.1 IntroductionGroup work in academic settings has several benefits for students when compared to traditionallessons: studies have shown increased academic achievement [1]–[4] and greater socialinteraction and critical thinking skills [1], [4] when students participate in group work. Groupwork has also been shown to be particularly beneficial for underrepresented groups in STEMbecause group work has been linked with reinforcing students’ sense of belonging, self-concept,and self-efficacy [5]. Belonging, self-concept and self-efficacy are in turn associated withpersistence in STEM [3].However, the benefits of group work are not always universal. Underrepresented studentssometimes experience diminished or even negative
Yerrick, Fresno State University Randy Yerrick is Dean of the Kremen School for Education and Human Development at CSU Fresno. He has also served as Professor of Science Education at SUNY Buffalo where he Associate Dean and Sci- ence Education Professor for the Graduate School of Education. Dr. Yerrick maintains an active research agenda focusing on two central questions: 1) How do scientific norms of discourse get enacted in class- rooms and 2) To what extend can historical barriers to STEM learning be traversed for underrepresented students through expert teaching practices? For his efforts in examining science for the under-served, Dr. Yerrick has received numerous research and teaching awards including the Journal
maintaining the integrity ofengineering programs within higher education. Stakeholders of programs include students,faculty, and employers. Each stakeholder can provide their own perspective as to the assessmentof the various skills that engineering programs boast to produce in their graduates. In particular,students strive to develop skills needed to be successful upon graduation within industry. Theskills required to be assessed by ABET, one of the largest international accrediting organizations,are considered to be skills that can cross many disciplines and not necessarily isolated for oneparticular field. Bennet [1] refers to these skills as generic skills. Chan, Zhao, and Luk [2]indicates that these skills include academic and problem-solving
encounter in completing their design project. Troubleshooting skill is an importantand integral part of good engineering practice. This skill represents the ability to identify and fixa problem within an engineered system by strategizing the approach within a time-constrainedsetting. To address this weakness, our group of five Engineering faculty members formed alearning community to devise an initiative to better prepare students for troubleshooting tasks. Itis expected that this should help them not only achieve greater success in their senior designproject, but also better prepare them for the workforce. While several recent studies helpilluminate what types of short-term (within 1 course) interventions may be successful inimproving students
, Opportunity, Education KnowledgeCommunity Involvement, and Desire to Right Wrongs. The individual themes identified hereare aligned with and supported by publications in engineering education and other disciplines.The central ideas of our findings are two-fold. First, an Opportunity is often the catalyst forthe boundary-crossing between the disparate disciplines of engineering and education.Second, having an intrinsic motivation (i.e., Desire to Right Wrongs) and the external supportof Community Involvement are crucial to help the researcher continue to thrive and explorewithin this dual-discipline in which boundary-crossing is endemic.IntroductionWork on ways to improve the education of future engineers is not new [1]. For example, in theUnited
efficacy of exam wrappers for reflective learning has been established inSTEM disciplines such as physics, biology, chemistry, and math. Very little research in usingexam wrappers in engineering and computing courses has been conducted to date. Twocontributions of this paper are (1) a characterization of the recent findings in engineering andcomputing education literature on the efficacy of exam wrappers, and (2) an analysis of thequestion types used on those exam wrappers. A third contribution of the paper is an examinationof the efficacy of exam wrappers in an upper-level computer science course. The studyinvestigates the relationship between student performance on two midterm exams before andafter introducing exam wrappers. Student responses
transfer students and a relatively smaller increase inpersistence intentions of students working full-time than other students.IntroductionOnline education is witnessing an extensive rise in student enrollment [1-2]. Online education alsocontinues to experience higher percentage of dropouts than the in-person face-to-face programs[3-5]. Several reasons for students dropping out from the online courses/programs have beendocumented, including feeling isolated [6], challenges with balancing academics and personaldemands [7-9], inadequate faculty and peer support [6][9-10], challenges with technology [7][11],and lack of engagement [7][11-12]. Course designs that engage students through course materialsand through communications with peers and
, civil,biomedical, electrical, and mechanical engineering [1-7]. Considered a critical instructionalstrategy for aiding students in developing durable professional “soft” skills [8, 9], team-basedlearning involves collaborative interactions among students to achieve a common design goal.To be sure, the ability to function on teams and communicate effectively are two process skillsthat all engineering students should acquire as a result of completing a post-secondary programof study in engineering [10]. In engineering, team-based learning often occurs through product orprocess design projects. While the details of team-based design projects may vary by discipline,in general, they have three features. First, they present an open-ended problem to
strategies in their classrooms.Results indicated that collaborative learning and problem-based learning were two most commonly usedactive learning strategies, while 1-minute paper and peer instruction were the least commonly usedstrategies. Participants agreed that active learning improved student learning outcomes, and motivatedstudents to participate in the class, but required an increased workload during the development ofactivities. The results of this study may inform future faculty development efforts on adoption of activelearning strategies in classrooms that were proven to improve student learning and retention inengineering education.IntroductionActive learning approach has gained increasing popularity in engineering education. The
instruction during the pandemic offered both challenges andopportunities for producing self-directed learners. We recommend that engineering schoolsimplement more interventions to help engineering students enhance their self-directed learningcapabilities.Keywords: online, self-directed learning, motivation, social cognitive perspective, pandemicIntroduction The current COVID-19 pandemic has brought about unprecedented academic disruptions topostsecondary education, alongside tremendous social and economic impacts to almost all sectors. InCanada, over 90% of postsecondary campuses moved some or all their courses online in response tothe pandemic, according to a Statistics Canada survey report in May 2020 [1]. After a summer ofintense planning
student responses andexamine how they make connections between their personal values and the ways those valuesmight contribute to their success in the classroom. Three dominant themes emerged from studentresponses: 1) Self-improvement; 2) Empathy/Kindness and 3) Helping. These themes provide abetter understanding of the kinds of values that are important to students and offer insight into theirinterest and motivation as it relates to learning in engineering mechanics. Given the abstract,decontextualized mode in which engineering sciences are typically taught, instructors can work toidentify and develop these personal connections and enhance student motivation and expectancyfor success in what are foundational areas of an engineering curriculum
semester or two of preparatory mathematics before they are able to take partin the fundamentals of engineering course that is a first-year, first-semester course for studentswho are enrolled in mathematics course of pre-calculus or higher. These populations of studentsare likely to have low social capital or pre-existing networks in areas that would support theircollege experience [1]. Therefore, the peer and faculty mentoring and cross-cohort socializationhave been integrated into the program as ways to help expand the social capital of students whomay need it.Social Capital is the availability, accessibility, and activation of resources via social relationshipsaccording to Lin [1]. While overarching societal structures encompassing
doctoral programs, the numbers are staggering,especially for engineering disciplines. According to the Council of Graduate Schools, attritionfrom engineering doctoral programs ranges from 35% for men to 44% for women, with higherrates reported for students in minority groups [1], [2]. Despite such staggering statistics,researchers have just begun to focus on education at the graduate level in response to a call fromthe National Academies for educational change, particularly in science, technology, engineering,and mathematics [3]. Ameliorating attrition at the graduate level is vital because each Ph.D.student who leaves their program represents an investment of both time and money by thestudents themselves and universities, departments, and
identified collaboration and communication as core aspects ofengineering work. Discussions of other social aspects of engineering, such as engaging withstakeholders, collaborating with users, or considering the societal implications of engineeringwork, were relatively limited. Understanding engineering students’ beliefs about the socialaspects of engineering work based on their previous experiences can help us better alignengineering curricula to promote more holistic and inclusive views of engineering.1. IntroductionEngineering is an inherently social discipline. The social aspects of engineering work include thevarious ways that engineers, within the context of their professional roles, impact, interact with,and relate to both broader society and
Associate Editor of the Journal of Engineering Education. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021A Characterization of Engineering and Computer Science Undergraduate Participation in High Impact Educational Practices at Two Western Land Grant Institutions IntroductionTo maintain its technological competitiveness and innovation leadership into the 21st century,the United States requires a robust engineering and computer science (E/CS) workforce withsubstantial diversity across gender and underrepresented racial and ethnic minority groups [1][2]. However, there are growing concerns about the ability of U.S. educational
portfolio as “a purposeful collection of student work that exhibits thestudent’s efforts, progress, and achievements in one or more areas”, and the authors also add that“the collection must include…evidence of student self-reflection” [1]. Knott et al. describes apilot e-portfolio (electronic portfolio) project developed at Virginia Tech. The authors note that88 percent of students wanted to continue using the e-portfolio as way of keeping samples oftheir work, recording their progress, and reflecting on their work [2]. Similar student appeal toe-portfolios is seen in [3]. Heinricher et al. also conduct a pilot project of three different portfoliomodels at Worcester Polytechnic Institute and found “portfolios increased students’goal-directedness
predictors in the first year, and race does not become asignificant predictor of dropout until the second year. The factors that influence dropout changeover time which emphasize the importance of dynamic dropout prediction models. The findingsfrom each phase of our analysis highlight the complexity of understanding the causes of dropoutand the importance of personalizing interventions for specific populations within a cohort.IntroductionNearly 20 million students attended American colleges and universities in Fall 2019, and roughly625,000 of these students were enrolled in an undergraduate engineering program[1], [2]. Thirtypercent of engineering students drop out before the second year[3], and more than 60 percent ofdropouts occur in the first two
of social programs.Dr. Cristian Ruz, Pontificia Universidad Cat´olica de ChileMr. Tom´as Andr´es Gonz´alez, Pontificia Universidad Cat´olica de Chile American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021 A Protocol to Follow up Students in Large-Enrollment Courses1. IntroductionIn response to the COVID-19 health crisis, two thirds of higher education institutions quicklymoved to online education [1]. As a result, students faced unexpected difficulties, such aslack of a good study environment, which affected their wellbeing [1]. Aware of thoseadditional difficulties, some institutions promoted a flexible approach, suggesting teachers toincrease communication with their
activities, iv) Family Caféevents, and v) Summer workshop for STEM teachers.i) NASA-STEM content developmentThe NASA STEM contents were first identified based on the existing lesson plans adopted inparticipating schools in Broward and Palm Beach Counties in Florida. Then, the NASA STEMcontents were embedded into the NGSSS based on the lesson plans and instructional calendar.The methodology adopted for NASA-STEM content development is shown in Figure 1. Thevarious steps were: i) Review and analyze the existing curriculum followed by the schools andwork closely with the STEM teachers to identify available time-slots to introduce NASA-STEMcontent to their existing lesson plans; ii) Download the NASA’s STEM content for Grades 6, 8,11-12 from the NASA
softwaredevelopment and engineering problems, why should we not provide them an environment wherethey can be familiar with the industrial software development, engineering and projectmanagement practices? This paper explores the project based instructional benefits in an industrysetup using Industry Standard Tools and Practices (IST&Ps) and investigates the learningeffectiveness and engagement. IST&P involves software development, deployment andmanagement tools, and common Agile practices using popular web-based tools widely used inindustries. Our approach is to engage students in cross-course collaboration [1] with Agilepractices with three groups of 3rd and 4th year undergraduate students among three project-basedcourses: Software Engineering (SE
this review, a comprehensivecollection of relevant publications was compiled by identifying appropriate search terms,databases and inclusion criteria. An initial search identified 478 results. Once 223 duplicateswere removed, the titles and abstracts of the remaining 255 publications were screened and 201records were removed because of their irrelevance to the topic of interest. Finally, the full-textsof 54 articles were assessed for eligibility and articles were excluded based on (1) lacked aframework (n = 25); (2) irrelevance to engineering in higher education (n = 15); and (3)examined the process of argumentation, rather than a produced argument (n = 2).The full texts of the 11 qualifying studies were then examined and coded to reveal
with how they viewthemselves and feel they are seen by others. These experiences were used to develop a model tounderstand the ways perceived recognition is interpreted as meaningful by students. Two use-cases of this model are presented to illustrate ways the PIER model may be used by studentsbased on their experience with an engineering identity.IntroductionThis research paper presents a model for the interpretation of recognition by undergraduateengineering students. Identity researchers are encouraging educators to think beyond solelyteaching subject content and to include practices that support students seeing themselves asengineers [1]–[5]. Engineering role identity influences student learning, persistence, andmotivation [6]–[8], which