graduating students to pursue and achieve theirperceived success.This is a Research Paper and Evidence-Based Practice Paper to explore how graduatingundergraduate engineering students conceive of career and personal success. Through aqualitative review of “vision plans” students create to map to their first 5 to 10 years post-graduation plans, we have categorized areas for success that include themes of production,experience, character and relationships. Through in-class exercises in a senior year (non-capstone) course on professional orientation and a freshmen class orienting students to college,30 students used exercises and assignments that have them use design thinking, networking, andinformational interviews to better identify and understand
Industrial Engineering (MIE) in the COE has modified itscurriculum to include a course, which addresses essential life and career skills to its students intheir final semester. The course addresses challenges ranging from how to deal with financialpressure, seeking career opportunities, time management, workplace etiquette, and othernecessary skills. It consists of five different modules: Financial Planning, Effective Job Hunting,Accelerating Your Career, Learning Never Stops, and Entrepreneurship. Modules utilizemethodologies from experiential learning theory to enhance student learning and contribute tothe body of knowledge of teaching methods in STEM.An initial assessment was performed to measure the impact of this course and its modules.Metrics
metacognitive reflections about their participation in these informal learningenvironments.Background and MotivationThe conceptualization of “thinking about thinking” has evolved since Flavell [8] first discussedmetacognition. Researchers have agreed that metacognition consists of knowledge of cognitionand regulation of cognition [8, 19, 20, 25]. Knowledge about cognition describes individuals’self-knowledge, knowledge about strategies, as well as appropriate application of differentstrategies in practice. Knowledge about cognition consists of three types of knowledge includingdeclarative knowledge, procedural knowledge and conditional knowledge [10]. Regulation ofcognition indicates that individuals are capable of planning, managing information
learning30 and co-generation.31 The students receive researcher’s expert opinion,which provides the benefits of cognitive apprenticeship.21In each iteration, two separate groups of students work toward building two identical robots. Forone group, the teacher and researcher use traditional qualitative observation, brainstorming,discussion, questionnaire, and feedback methods to analyze the outcomes of the iteration.7,8 Forthe second group, in addition to the traditional methods, the teacher and researcher follow someadvanced systems engineering approaches under the cognitive apprenticeship of the expertresearcher. The DBR is treated as a continuous improvement (CI) method,32 and resembles as theDeming or Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) cycle.33 The teacher
Making Academic Change Happen (MACH) project. The UW membersof the REDPAR team (i.e., the authors of this paper) investigate the academic change processesoccurring across the schools through a participatory action approach, co-producing knowledgewith the team members.In the case of incorporating new teaching methods and curricular designs to STEM academicprograms, education entrepreneurs manage both technological innovations and the people andorganizations that will implement the innovations. In the proposal development stage, REDapplicants strategized about which curricular innovations would be best suited for theirinstitutional contexts. They planned how to implement these changes, but these plans were notoften made in open deliberations
inengineering.In this work-in-progress paper, we describe a design-based research project that explores howstudents adopt positive learning behaviors and dispositions through a course, because positivelearning behaviors and dispositions have been shown to increase persistence through challengesand setbacks4.We have designed a course titled Engineering the Mind as an eight-week, second-half semestercourse that is offered for one semester-hour of credit. We plan to pilot this course in Spring 2017to prepare for the Fall 2017 offering.BackgroundDesign-Based ResearchDesign-based research (DBR) is a research paradigm that attempts to bridge laboratory studieswith complex, instructional intervention studies5. DBR is described as “theoretically-framed,empirical
valuable in professional life (96%), improved their leadershipskills (92%), and had gained appreciation for the value of project planning (100%) and technicaldocumentation (96%). It is anticipated that lessons learned from the project sequence willprovide the framework for cross-disciplinary freshman and sophomore assignments in hostinstitution’s PBL curriculum in the future.Keywords: Project management, Rube Goldberg machines, Project Based Learning1. IntroductionAccreditation of engineering programs has long provided a means of quality control of graduatesin the United States.1 In recent years, this practice has come to reflect an emphasis on theoutcomes of student learning rather than on restrictive earlier notions centered on what is
available for PSUs or USUs. Stratum caneasily be developed and employed with minimum input allowing a researcher to consider ormitigate secondary variables. Consequently, if a researcher decides that additional or fewer strataare needed, the methodology proposed can be easily generalized to increase or limit theprobability of a person or institution being included as an USU.Multistage Sampling has both economic and statistical benefits. Simple random sampling is bothcostly when implemented on a national scale and does not guarantee an accurate representationof the population. Comparatively, multistage sampling designs are considered more costeffective without sacrificing size because multistage sampling plans are designed to capturesubpopulations
undergraduate engineering students about their future career plans?RQ 2: How do engineering students who are “career certain” differ from those who expresssome level of uncertainty when thinking about their professional futures?In this study, career certainty is defined as “the degree to which individuals feel confident, ordecided, about their occupational plans” (Hartung, 1995, p. 1). Thereby, “career certain”students are those students with the highest degree of confidence, or decidedness about theiroccupational plans.2. Theoretical BackgroundExisting literature describes the difference between career certain and uncertain students,considering various variables (Guay et al., 2003), including a student’s backgroundcharacteristics. The results suggest
extent to which the three strategies are (1) currently being implemented, and (2)are planned to be implemented. The supposition was that those scoring higher on VECTERS’value and expectancy items would be more likely to currently be integrating a classroom strategyand would be more likely to plan on using the strategy in the future (either initiating orcontinuing to use). Regarding costs, a cost-increases-with-usage hypothesis was supposed bysome on the research team even though expectancy theory supported the cost-decreases-with-usage hypothesis.Construct validity was further examined by applying orthogonal (varimax) rotation factoranalysis. Analysis was applied to VECTERS’ three sub-tests (formative feedback, real-worldapplications, and
fleeting.The following vignette is an example of a typical type of interaction that is not planned andemerges momentarily to address a specific purpose before passing quickly. This vignette alsoshows how these types of interactions seem occasioned by the fact that new engineers frequentlywork in isolation and more senior engineers only sometimes check in on the progress of theirwork or in order to correct them.This case involves a chemical engineer, Curtis, who works in the position of developmentalengineer for Large Southern Steel Mill. The title of “developmental engineer” was part of aprogram initiated by the company to bring in and train new engineering talent, in order toinculcate them into the ways of the company (thus not requiring the “re
PBSL Activities The four PBSL activities are as follows: 1) “I am an instructor in a STEM class”: At the moment of the writing, we are still discussingwith a local high school for details. We plan to conduct this activity in fall 2017. 2) “Design customized food barrels for a food pantry”: This project challenges sophomoresto work on a project that is not strictly designed (assumptions, contexts, etc.) but has a concreteend goal. Through communication with employees at the local food pantry, 16 students in 8teams interacted with them at each step of their projects such as design, development, and testphases to maintain constant goal alignment. This activity is being implemented into theTechnical Communications course this semester
manufactured material. The overarching question forthe student to answer for the mock court and mock jury was why the material degraded andeventually failed. The degraded material provided the sample for analysis and characterization.Individual student problem solving required tier one prerequisite fundamental knowledge inSTEM disciplines in order to identify a strategic plan for root cause analysis of a failed material.Tier two application of this knowledge enabled systematic characterization of the failedsubstance to be conducted. Lastly, advanced knowledge and analytical skills completed the threetier scaffolding necessary to guide the student working on the PBL project. The student’s finalwritten report and expert testimony presented to the mock
intended to capture students’ attitudes, behaviors, and beliefsrelated to planning their initial career steps, including (1) their current plan of study, (2)undergraduate experiences, (3) knowledge, beliefs, and influences, (4) career plans andexpectations, and (5) background characteristics. The “knowledge, beliefs, and influences”section includes questions in which students are asked to self-report their subjective task values(STV) related to finding a first position post-graduation.The research team developed items for the four dimensions of the STV construct – attainmentvalue, intrinsic value, utility value, and cost – in close consultation with published surveysutilizing EVT in education and engineering education17-19,24-25 to ensure that the
future when hecontinues, “In view of that, I’ve been doing some internships. I’ve had a couple of internships. Ithink it’s enough to help me lecture, but to get out in that field more is going to be helpful.”Mark perceived he will not have enough industry experience, which led to him to plan a moreimmediate future goal in industry. He is able to directly find usefulness in his graduate-leveltasks to his future because he put a lot of thought into defining his future self. For this study, the five participants displayed different conceptualizations of task value.Note that each participant was not asked about how tasks directly relate to their defined futures,but rather how they valued the tasks they were performing. Mark is the only
. Students were tasked with developing two general designs of a multi-purpose event center, considering maximum capacity, ways for people and vehicles to enter and exit the property, and a layout of a general plan for the property. 2. Water runoff. Students created a 100-year flood plan in which they calculated the total runoff for a 100-year flood plan and designed two drainage systems, describing the advantages and disadvantages of each. 3. Structures. Students designed a simple 3D model of the building and produced elevation sketches for the front, side, and back of the building. Additionally, students were tasked with incorporating novel features to make the structure eco-friendly. 4
thatschool leaders and teachers, respectively, consider preparation of and participation in professionaldevelopment (PD) programs prior to implementing robotics for reform-based STEM instruction.22Unfortunately, scant research is available on effective PD programs for teachers to create andimplement STEM teaching practices using robotics. Thus, we have designed, implemented, andstudied a three-week summer PD program (15 sessions, 8hrs. per session) for middle schoolscience and math teachers. Through this PD effort, teachers were expected to deepen theirtechnological-pedagogical-and-content knowledge (TPACK),23 develop lesson plans by utilizingrobotic kits for standards-aligned science and math curricula, and improve their students’ STEMinterest and
caused a loss ofproject data, and six mentioned needing to improve their skills with using a computer and/or theediting software. One student offered: I spent eight hours on my project, and I lost my flash drive. So I learned to back it up. I have an external hard drive now so I can back up to it. When you said to make a backup in the lab, I just made a copy on the same flash drive. I never thought of losing my flash- drive.In terms of demonstrating communication skills, seven of the nine students interviewed haddeveloped a planning document to assist with the organization and planning of the video project.While such a document was recommended for completing the project, there was no requiredtemplate or format assigned
concern for young, probationary faculty. Another challenge is using the flipped approach in large-lecture classrooms. Manygateway STEM courses are larger lectures, which opposes some of the core tenets of the flippedclassroom. Faculty teaching larger STEM courses have reported difficulties in maintaining activelearning with 80 or more students (that it creates a chaotic learning environment). Althoughresearch has shown effective use of the flipped approach in larger classrooms, greater discussionwithin the FLCs is planned to delineate more effective in-class activities for larger class formats. A third challenge is maintaining communication in the discipline-specific FLCs. Thefaculty who teach these gateway STEM courses are feeling
S 3.54 3. The reviews I received helped F 3.49 F 3.72 me understand what I needed to S 3.77 S 3.51 change about my work. 4. I trust the feedback I received. F 3.53 F 3.65 S 3.63 S 3.37 5.I plan to change (or already F 3.75 F 3.77 changed) my work based on the S 3.91 S 3.71 review process. 6. I felt comfortable giving F 3.84 F 3.70 feedback to my peers. S 4.02 S 3.88 7. I felt
of these change initiatives. We learned the importance of social actors in creating a discourse of change within engineering, the conditions that produced successes, and that resources must be mobilized and structures must accommodate changes in order for them to succeed. 4. Strategic Planning: The university has recently conducted a strategic planning process that has resulted in six pathways including Changemaking and Care for Our Common Home. We have leveraged this institutional initiative by conducting three strategic planning sessions in the school that emphasized developing a shared meaning of Changemaking Engineering. Faculty members performed a SWOT analysis, identifying the most important
beliefs about competence in a domain; it is notnecessarily task-specific. Students’ expectancy is based partly on their self-efficacy14 in additionto their perceptions about the difficulty of the goal, their prior experience, and peerencouragement from others19 . Students with high self-efficacy use more cognitive andmetacognitive strategies as well as self-regulatory strategies such as planning, monitoring, andregulating20 .Future Time PerspectiveFuture Time Perspective (FTP) theory takes into account aspects of achievement motivation thatpertain to students’ perceptions of the time dimension of tasks and goals21-23 . FTP integratesperceptions about the future into present task completion and motivational goal setting. FTPprovides insight into
reflective and behavioral implications of survey-taking, the currentstudy investigates open-ended comments that students self-reported at the end of a recentengineering education survey. We gathered our data from the Engineering Majors Survey(EMS), a study of engineering students from a nationally representative sample of 27 U.S.engineering schools. The EMS is intended to follow junior and senior engineeringstudents from their undergraduate education into their career. So far the first (“EMS 1.0”)and second (“EMS 2.0”) waves have been administered, one year apart, with additionalfollow-up surveys planned. The EMS asks a variety of questions about engineeringstudents’ past academic and extracurricular experiences, confidence performing variousskills
. Design Applies to initial solution concepts as well as to the final design. Step Feasibility Assessing and passing judgment on a possible or planned solution to the problem. Determineworkability, does it meet constraints, criteria, etc.? Evaluation Comparing and contrasting two (or more) solutions to the problem on a particular dimension (or set of dimensions) such as strength or cost. Decision Selecting one idea or solution to the problem (or parts of the problem) from
present a thorough overview of the technical plans for the project to an IndependentReview Team, which used a mixed set of technical expertise to assess the project 2. This CDRdiffered somewhat from traditional CDRs because some subsystems were known to still needadditional work, which is a consequence of the development timing and schedule constraints.Additionally, CubeSats for exploration beyond Earth orbit are relatively new within NASAhistory, and this particular project was targeting flight on a launch vehicle that is still indevelopment. The goal of the BioSentinel project is to measure the effects of radiation on DNA in deepspace in preparation for sending humans to Mars (NASA, n.d.). It will carry speciallydesigned strains of
yearimplementation of the TDGs, group discussion focused on group leader planning and progress,the role of the group leaders, and successes with the group and concerns about the group. Forexample in September, the discussion focused on the nature of the meetings. One group leaderstated, “we plan to meet once a month.” Later in the semester, group leaders discussed the natureof their interactive teaching changes. One group leader, “I ask questions… on notecards… [thestudents] have a choice: to ask me a question or being asked a question. And they getmicrophones and I call like 30 cards a session. So, it is part of the whole lecture experience.” Inthe second semester, discussion focused on the progress of teaching development groupmembers toward making
: built into the key program features were evaluation criteriathat efforts be “radically, suddenly, or completely new; producing fundamental, structuralchange; or going outside of or beyond existing norms and principles” [6]. With an innovativedepartment head or dean at the helm, change had to be rooted in engineering education research,a social science understanding of organizations, and a theoretical change framework that couldmove research to practice, with team composition reflecting this varied expertise. Facultydevelopment efforts, incorporation of professional practice, and a plan for scalability thatcountered anticipated obstacles had to be baked in to the original vision and project plan.With NSF investing relatively large amounts of
Team and Initial organization description: Establishing a team with a diverse set of skills advice: • Bring a social scientist onto the team as early as possible • Create sub-teams, assign tasks, and define roles that play to team members’ strengths.Project Management and Maintaining Flexibility description: Defining a workflow and establishing deadlines for accountability, while also maintaining flexibility to deal with internal and external changes. advice: • Do not underestimate the time different elements of the project, like assessment, will take. • Have a plan and start early. • Respond
work versus engineering work amongengineering students soon to graduate, there may be fewer differentiators betweenstudents with engineering-focused plans and those with more unsettled plans. This meansthat there are many contingencies to investigate in terms of how students ultimately landin their first and subsequent jobs within the first few years of graduating. Providing somegranularity to the picture, Brunhaver’s study of recent engineering graduates indicatesthat while the majority of graduates were working in engineering-focused positions fouryears after graduation, about 20% of graduates were working in non-engineering focusedpositions.6 We note that although demographic factors did not seem to differentiatepathways at this stage, co
from three administrations of ATI-22. As mentionedbefore, ATI-22 was administered to all participants to the Teaching Workshop before itstarted (PRE). In the first administration, CFTP members were included. Then, there was asecond administration of the ATI-22 as a post-test (POST-1) at the end of the TeacherWorkshop, in which all participants (including CFTP members) took part. In this case,participants were asked to fill out the ATI-22 thinking about what they planned to do thefollowing semester. We wanted to see whether there was a change due to the workshop.There was a semester-long training program, only for CFTP members, which ended with theadministration of the ATI-22 as a post-test (POST-2). The following subsection of resultspresents