Engineering Education at Purdue University. Her research focuses what factors influence diverse students to choose engineering and stay in engineering through their careers and how different experiences within the practice and culture of engineering foster or hinder belongingness and identity development. Dr. Godwin graduated from Clemson University with a B.S. in Chemical Engineering and Ph.D. in Engineering and Science Education. She is the recipient of a 2014 American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) Educational Research and Methods Di- vision Apprentice Faculty Grant. She has also been recognized for the synergy of research and teaching as an invited participant of the 2016 National Academy of Engineering
personal journeys as engineers. That [The older SHPE student’s] motivation translated into their school as well, into them being engineering students, and to their professional development, and you could tell every single one of these people here, these guys are going to accomplish their education, accomplish their career. –Manolo I quickly started to see the benefits of SHPE...most importantly hearing what other Latino engineers were like, and how they got there, hearing their story. –AnthonyNurturing an engineering familia Within SHPE students found more than friendship and collegiality, they found a familia(family) of engineers. The students discussed the strong ties that connected them to their peers
the next generation of faculty: Graduate school as socialization to an academic career. The Journal of Higher Education, 73(1), 94 – 122.Austin, A.E., & McDaniels, M. (2006). Preparing the professoriate of the future: Graduate student socialization for faculty roles. In: Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research, Volume 22, p 397 – 456.Blume-Kohout, M.E. & Adhikari, D. (2016). Training the scientific workforce: Does funding mechanism matter? Research Policy, 45, 1291 – 1303.Burt, B. (2014). The influence of doctoral research experiences on the pursuit of the engineering professoriate (Doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan).Carlone, H.B. & Johnson, A. (2007). Understanding the science
campusculture [9], [10]. In these studies, campus culture considered (1) classroom experiences, (2)faculty-staff relationship, (3) institutional support services, (4) peer interactions, (5) studenteffort to learn, (6) goal development and management, and (7) institutional commitment. As aresult, we integrated these components of campus culture into our understanding of institutionalclimate to ground our data collection approach and provide a helpful framework for uncoveringways in which institutional climate can impact how a Black HBCU undergraduate engineering orcomputing student navigates their post-graduate planning and decision-making.Identity and SuccessUnderstanding how an institution’s culture and climate support students’ personal identities is
returning students may feel out of place or unwelcomedin their graduate programs1, 5. An earlier qualitative study of engineering doctoral returners bytwo members of our team7 supports these findings and suggested returners face a number ofcosts, including those related to finances, balance of work and personal responsibilities, theirlevel of academic preparedness, and adapting to the cultural environment of engineering PhDprograms.Despite these challenges, having extensive prior work experience before pursuing PhD workmay prove to be valuable for returners’ academic work. Returners have a wide range of pastpersonal and professional experiences, which may include work in education, industry,government, or the military, that can inform their
from Purdue University. Her research characterizes front-end design practices across the student to practitioner continuum and studies the impact of developed front-end design tools on design success.Ms. Leah Paborsky, University of Michigan Leah is a graduate from the University of Michigan with a B.S.E. in Mechanical Engineering and minor in Space Sciences and Engineering. She served as an undergraduate research assistant in the Daly Design and Engineering Education Research Group focusing on engineers’ beliefs about social aspects of engineering work. She is currently pursuing a M.S. in Aerospace Engineering Sciences at University of Colorado- Boulder.Dr. Sara L. Hoffman, University of Michigan Sara Hoffman
three personas have been developed using the 2020 application pool. While thetarget personas used for the rubrics were developed using the process noted above, thesepersonas were developed using the student responses to the applications. For a more in-depthdiscussion of the method used, see our prior work [19].General Applicant Persona: Mark JohnsonMark is from North Carolina. He didn’t attend a community college before coming to thisuniversity. Both of his parents are college graduates. Mark is a second-year student in themechanical engineering concentration. Making the leap from an easy high school career to amuch more difficult undergraduate engineering career and learning how to effectively study isthe biggest academic challenge Mark has
Page 26.1323.11 potential to both create and make visible a wide range of connections—what I might call integration in time and integration in the person (phrases I arrived at after talking with Lauren). Regarding the former, I described to Lauren my hope that the reflection activity we discussed helped the learners inquestion—graduate students interested in engineering education—relate their experiences in an onlineworkshop to prior experiences and knowledge about engineering education, as well as to anticipatedexperiences in their academic careers. Ideally, learners would gain more from the online workshopexperiences by understanding them in this larger temporal context. What I am calling integration in the person is another
an S-STEM team member for an end-of-semesterone-to-one meeting to discuss their current academic status along with their graduate school orprofessional career goals.Mentoring also plays a crucial role for women and minority students who are significantly under-represented in academia, particularly in STEM fields [15]. When asked about the key factors inrecruiting and retaining women to careers in the trades and STEM fields, Donna Milgram [16],the executive director of the Institute for Women in Trades Technology and Science (IWITTS)identified the paucity of female role models and female mentors in STEM careers. In line withher impressions, some of our activities have been explicitly aimed to encourage and supportfemale students, such as
Sheppard. Her work focuses on fostering mindful awareness, empathy and curiosity in engineering students. Beth completed a BS in Aerospace Engineering from the University of Virginia in 2010 and a MS in Mechanical Engineering from Stanford in 2012.Dr. Samantha Ruth Brunhaver, Arizona State University Samantha Brunhaver is an Assistant Professor of Engineering in the Ira A. Fulton Schools of Engineering at Arizona State University. Dr. Brunhaver joined Arizona State after completing her M.S. and Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering at Stanford University. She also has a B.S. in Mechanical Engineering from Northeastern University. Dr. Brunhaver’s research examines the career decision-making and professional identity
.— AthenaDemanding advisors who lacked a robust work-life balance and failed to instill a passion for theirresearch in their graduate assistants presented participants with an undesirable career model inacademia. Participants whose advisors were yet to attain tenure exhibited the most acute disdainfor a future in academia. Students in this situation began to question their desire to becomefaculty, which caused them to reevaluate why they were pursuing a doctorate at all.The relationship participants had with their advisors formed a crucial component of theirexperience. Most participants spoke about their frustrations working with faculty memberswhom they did not perceive as being held accountable for subpar mentorship and, in some cases,exploitation of
person to coordinate a system like healthcare in the US? In thefaculty context, how do faculty members, students, administrators, government funders, andothers come together through documentation and in person to coordinate, for example, tenurepractices? I was interested in extending this to engineering student life – how did ruling relationsinfluence the structure of undergraduate education? And did it influence engineering differentlythan the other “letters” of STEM? So I built this theory into my CAREER grant proposal, titledLearning from Small Numbers (LfSN). I grounded my argument in both engineering educationresearch and women’s studies literature, and argued that: 1. the choice of much existing engineering education research on gender
majorsin higher education, engineering is a professional major (i.e., engineering bachelor’s degreeprograms prepare students for careers in the engineering profession; an engineering bachelor’sdegree is prerequisite for gaining employment as an engineer). With this understanding of theprofessional nature of engineering study, the traditional success marker of degree attainment wasconflated with the participants’ social mobility/career goal in this study. Based on the co-creatednarratives, it is clear that all participants desired to work as engineers. Moreover, 11 of 14participants indicated that degree attainment was a personal marker for success. Therefore, degreeattainment as a marker for success cannot be wholly separated from the social
many ofthe themes may be the same.Graduate level engineering education research promotes that graduate socialization into theexpectations and norms of academic engineering are complex and overlap. Berdanier,Whitehair, Kirn, and Satterfield [21] recently studied how students discuss the overlapsbetween these factors, understanding that no one factor likely pushes a student to changesignificant career goals such as pursuing a PhD. They presented a new model for graduateattrition, called the GrAD model, to explore the dynamic nature of the decision to leave.Other scholars have delved into the importance of research group dynamics and role modelsto students forming academic engineering identities and developing competencies in graduateschool. For
there are actionablesteps that faculty members and graduate teaching assistants can take to positively influencecareer interest in computer science for undergraduates. Results also underscore steps that facultycan take to design educational approaches within their classrooms that would sustain interest in acomputer science degree among both males and females.Keywords: career interest, interactionalist theory, personal factorsIntroductionRecent trends point to increased interest in computer science as a career as colleges nationallyare experiencing an increased number of enrollments in computer science courses and programs[1]. Institutions are not able to match the demands in student enrollment with increased facultyhires or even appropriate
Paper ID #11535A Series of Singular Testimonies: A New Way to Explore Unearned Advan-tages and Unearned DisadvantagesDr. Julie P Martin, Clemson University Julie P. Martin is an assistant professor of Engineering and Science Education at Clemson University. Her research interests focus on social factors affecting the recruitment, retention, and career development of underrepresented students in engineering. Dr. Martin is a 2009 NSF CAREER awardee for her research entitled, ”Influence of Social Capital on Under-Represented Engineering Students Academic and Career Decisions.” She held an American Association for the
, advancing work inthe community. Similarly, Percy Pierre described how, as director of the Sloan EngineeringProgram, he supported pre-college engineering education efforts for minority students. Althoughthese pioneers helped fund different kinds of engineering education work (research, teaching,and learning), they all described their influence more in terms of legitimacy for engineeringeducation than in monetary terms.Kemnitzer’s account focused on supporting early-career faculty through an NSF program thatwas the precursor to the current CAREER program. She recalled how the first award of this kindto a faculty member engaged in engineering education work was a significant step toward thefield gaining legitimacy at the national scale. She described
prompts students to experience new and different perspectives asthey build knowledge together [13]. When engineering and education students develop lessonplans collaboratively, they share expertise from their respective disciplines with each other. Theyalso bring personal experiences as students of a particular gender and background, withparticular interests. These perspectives inform their decision making as they collaborativelydesign lessons to engage their fifth/sixth grade partners. This practice integrating multipleperspectives is essential for engineers tackling complex interdisciplinary problems and futureteachers addressing the needs of an increasingly diverse student population.This study aims to answer the following research questions
as nonevidence.In terms of direct evidence, Trent provided one example. Specifically, he used his own personalexperience as being a person of color as an analogy to what women might experience inengineering (see 3 in Table 2): “You know, leveraging lived experience, if I sit here long enough, I can identify points of discrimination inequity. Looking for another word...bias...ironically, effectively along each point of my professional journey.”Because Trent used his personal experience to draw an analogy between the experiences ofwomen and people of color, we categorized this piece of evidence as direct evidence.6.1.2. FlynnOur second participant, Flynn, is a white male engineering faculty member. In the interview
Paper ID #17925First Generation Students’ Engineering BelongingnessMr. Hank Boone, University of Nevada, Reno Hank Boone is an Academic Success Coach at Nevada State College and a recent graduate from the University of Nevada, Reno. His research focuses on First Generation engineering college students’ engineering identity, belongingness, and how they perceive their college experience. He also worked under his advisor on a project looking at non-normative engineering students and how they may have differing paths to success. His education includes a B.S. and M.S. in Mechanical Engineering from University of Nevada
services?This paper reports on an evidence-based practice in a mid-sized engineering school within alarge East Coast public, four-year university. This partnership responds to students who needdifferent kinds of support and expertise as they confront both personal and academic challengesduring the engineering studies. The initiative is composed of a unique collaboration betweenacademic personnel [mainly the Associate Dean for Undergraduate Programs (ADUP), but alsoincluding rank and file faculty] and an Engineering Associate Dean of Students (EADoS)holding a PhD in Higher Education. The EADoS was embedded in the engineering school,physically collocated with the engineering undergraduate office, and served only engineeringstudents (as compared to
factors influence diverse students to choose engineering and stay in engineering through their careers and how different experiences within the practice and culture of engineering foster or hinder belongingness and identity development. Dr. Godwin graduated from Clemson University with a B.S. in Chemical Engineering and Ph.D. in Engineering and Science Education. She is the recipient of a 2014 American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) Educational Research and Methods Di- vision Apprentice Faculty Grant. She has also been recognized for the synergy of research and teaching as an invited participant of the 2016 National Academy of Engineering Frontiers of Engineering Ed- ucation Symposium and 2016 New Faculty
community facing engineering student-lead projects, and produced more than 200,000 community service hours. Butler brings faculty and industry partners together to mentor and support these student projects as students gain real-world experiences the necessary skills for future careers. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2020 STEM Energy Education in California San Joaquin ValleyBackgroundThere are significant educational equity gaps that exist in STEM fields for underrepresentedminority (URM) students who live in the San Joaquin Valley. URM students are defined as non-white and non-Asian, though it is recognized that there are subpopulations of URM
Psychology, vol. 29, pp. 66-75, 1982.[7] H. Tsai, “Development of an inventory of problem-solving abilities of tertiary students majoring in engineering technology,” World Transactions on Engineering and Technology Education, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 268 – 272, 2010.[8] P.P Heppner, T. E. Witty, and W. A. Dixon, “Problem-solving appraisal and human adjustment: A review of 20 years of research using the problem solving inventory,” Counseling Psychologist, vol. 32, pp. 344-428, 2004.[9] Y.P. Huang, and L. Y. Flores, “Exploring the validity of the Problem-Solving Inventory with Mexican American high-school students,” Journal of Career Assessment, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 431-441, 2011.[10] N. Kourmousi, V. Xythali, M. Theologitou, and V. Koutras
improve student engagementvia topic exploration. The goal of the partial classroom flipping was to engage students in activeproblem-solving. In addition, the design memo structure provided an opportunity to reflect onthe potential “pitfalls” if another faculty member were to implement the strategy. These were notnecessarily problems that the GL encountered, but guidelines to address potential problems. Forexample, the GL who implemented the mini-collaborative project suggested that the strategyshould be implemented in a class where a culture of collaboration has already been introduced.The GL who implemented the partially flipped classroom indicated that to avoid pitfalls facultyshould provide short problems that included all of the data tables
inhigher education highlights the critical need for change agents—individuals within academia andoutside of it willing to enact a transformation in STEM education at the curricular, institutional,and national levels. A core piece of ensuring a change in educational systems is the ability of theseagents to exercise their agency (i.e., free will or choice to act). However, the dominant norms inhigher education can limit opportunities for students, faculty members, or higher educationadministrators to enact their agency [3], [4]. A deeper understanding of how agency is defined andused in this context for research and policy changes can provide useful ways of catalyzing changein engineering education.Agency is an emerging theory within engineering
involving students in curriculum development and teaching through Peer Designed Instruction.Mr. Luis Miguel Procter, University of Texas, El Paso Luis M. Procter is currently pursuing a B.S. degree in engineering leadership with the University of Texas at El Paso, where he is an undergraduate Research Assistant.Anita D. Patrick, University of Texas, Austin Anita Patrick is a STEM Education Doctoral Student in the Department of Curriculum and Instruction, and Graduate Research Assistant in the Department of Mechanical Engineering at The University of Texas at Austin. She received her BS in Bioengineering from Clemson University where she tutored undergraduate mathematics and science courses, and mentored undergraduate
, discussing the nature of concepts beinglearned, and connecting the present with past learning. The verbal and nonverbal responses ofgroup members provide valuable feedback to a student’s performance. Promotive interaction alsofacilitates the formation of personal connections between group members. In the originalframework [20], the authors emphasized face-to-face interactions as being the catalyst drivingpromotive interaction. Therefore, this is one aspect of cooperative learning that should beseverely affected by the pandemic.Interpersonal and social skills refer to various skills that a student needs to successfullycooperate in a group. Some of these skills include leadership, decision-making, trust-building,communication, and conflict management
expectation source. However, that clarity is tempered by the stress of the academicexpectations themselves, as well as the potential implications of failure to fulfill them.Besides academics, expectations can also come from engineering superiors, who were definedas entities within the engineering major with influence to directly and professionally influence astudents’ grades, learning environment, career-related decisions and other engineeringexperiences. These entities range from individuals such as professors to small organizations suchas the student advising center.For example, if an instructor unknowingly creates a hostile learning environment with rigidexpectations and methods, the learning experience can become extremely stressful
achievement and career development.30 A total of 1,479 seniorengineering students participated in the survey. The results revealed that the students with moreworking experiences had a higher starting salary after graduation and were more likely to get ajob offer prior to graduation. But the influence of work experiences on GPA is minimal. Inaddition, the work experiences equally benefit male and female students. Samuelson and Litzlerspecifically explored the influence of work experiences on female students.31 They interviewed27 female engineering students with an internship or co-op experience. The internship and co-opexperiences influenced students’ perceptions of the engineering field, persistence in engineering,and career decisions. Overall, the