intentions foreshadow behaviors [15].Collaborating with Ajzen at the University of Illinois, the pair introduced subjective norms toincorporate how social dynamics affect intentionality, which culminating in the Theory ofReasoned Action (TRA) in 1980 [22]. The TRA’s usage spurred further studies into beliefs,norms, and behavioral expectations [23], [24]. In the mid-1980s, Ajzen extended the TRA’sapplicability with the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) [25], [26], [27], incorporatingperceived outcome control and other behavioral models [28], [29], [30]. The domain alsowitnessed practical applications of these theories during the AIDS epidemic, with governmentalbodies, including the National Institute of Mental Health, seeking behavioral
arranged some club events immediately after the CS I class to maximize CS I student participation. We allocated a work-study student to devote five to ten hours per week to planning, coordinating, hosting hybrid club meetings and events (both in-person and online) and increasing students’ access and engagement. 3. Form a Department Community Center with both in-person and virtual spaces: We established a pilot Department Community Center for students to get together, interact with and support each other. The Center was previously a research-only lab and is currently located in Room C03A. We extended its function to host the ExCITE program, the ACM club, and the ACM-W club. We complement this Center with a
Award, The Nevada Women’s Fun Woman of Achievement Award, and the UNR College of Engineering Excellence Award.Dr. Adam Kirn, University of Nevada, Reno Adam Kirn is an Associate Professor of Engineering Education at University of Nevada, Reno. His research focuses on the interactions between engineering cultures, student motivation, and their learning experiences. His projects involve the study of studenMr. Derrick James Satterfield, University of Nevada, Reno Derrick Satterfield is a doctoral candidate in Engineering Education at the University of Nevada, Reno. His research focuses on engineering graduate students’ experiences and motivation centered on career planning and preparation
-design courses with instructor-centered approaches. This suggests a disconnectbetween planned, enacted, and experienced elements of curriculum and lifelong learningoutcomes [7]. More research is needed to understand how or why current and recent students’perceptions of the effectiveness of their programs and courses sometimes contradict purportedbest practices, and the implications for lifelong learning motivations and strategies.Marra et al. [30] also explored how the nature of an undergraduate engineering programimpacted alumni lifelong learning, focusing on the program’s emphasis on metacognition andreflection often facilitated through team projects. The researchers interviewed 15 recentgraduates (3-4 years post-graduation) in the United
shared similar on-campus experiences to non-program participants. Moststudents also reported plans to pursue a career in STEM immediately following graduation,regardless of program participation.Additional analysis of open-ended response questions revealed more insight into student STEMinterest and experiences. Responses for S-STEM and non-S-STEM students were similar. Surveyrespondents shared that earning potential and job security were among the reasons they chose aSTEM major. When asked about individuals or experiences that encouraged their interest ordevelopment in STEM, multiple survey respondents indicated that their interest in STEM wasdue to their academic preparation or in some way inherent and indicative of their innate abilitiesand
up earlier to get them ready. The days that hedoesn’t go to school he asks why he doesn’t have school. I have to plan for those days…Sometimes it doesn’t come out as planned. I have to think about what to do. Things change,emergencies come up… I have a Plan A and Plan B just in case” (Family 31). Family relationship building—Another common theme across all seven families wasparents perceiving and leveraging the engineering activities and engineering design practices tosupport family collaboration and build relationships among family members, including siblings,spouses, or extended family members. As one parent stated when reflecting on the most valuableaspect of the program: "El tiempo juntos, aprender juntos uno del otro. Las ideas
, and readily analyzed, so wecould compare observations to faculty and student reports of engagement. Thus, we consideredexisting observation protocols. At first, we planned to use OPTIC, but pilot observations atmultiple institutions with POGIL, lecture, and laboratory classes, revealed that OPTIC workswell for POGIL, but not for lecture. Similarly, COPUS focuses on practices involving clickerquestions and Peer Instruction and is less suited for POGIL. Other protocols had similarlimitations - SEcLo and ELCOT focus on engineering, while PORTAAL and OSE focus onspecific settings. We liked protocols that coded widely used, lower-level practices (e.g., SPOT).We liked how OPTIC coded similar interactions at different levels — within teams
developing the design knowledge, skills, and abilities necessary for their success. Learning progressions outline students’ journeys through an academic program in thecontext of developing a specified competency or knowledge base and are important for assessingstudents’ achievements [9]. A learning progression framework presents a broad description ofessential content and general sequencing for student learning and skill development, providingscaffolding for curriculum design [10]. By developing HCED frameworks and assessment tools,we seek to assist educators in planning and building curricula for engineering students to develophuman-centered engineering design knowledge, skills, and mindsets [11]. We represent the Siebel Center for
to enhance Hispanic/Latino transfer student success. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 Investigating Motivation and Self-Regulated Learning for Students in a Fundamental Engineering CourseAbstractMotivation and self-regulated learning (SRL) are two interconnected constructs that are criticalfor student learning, especially for those in challenging fundamental engineering courses such asThermodynamics. Each of these elements are integral to the learning process and typicallyimpact one another, as fostering motivation can lead to improved self-regulatory skills. SRL isdescribed as a cyclical process where students plan, set goals, monitor learning, and reflect tofurther plan
effect of POGIL compared to traditional teaching methods. Themethodology is carefully planned and executed as per the flow chart. Figure 1. Methodology Flow chartProcess-Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL) was implemented in one of the batches,and careful planning of various factors was focused for successful execution. Initially, suitabletopics for POGIL activities were chosen. Then, student groups were framed with 3–4 membersfor collaborative work during POGIL activities. Then the designed POGIL activities weredistributed to the students to engage them in active learning, collaboration, and inquiry. Thismethod is implemented for a batch of 46 students. On the other hand, the traditional method ofteaching was
,“understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global, economic, environmental, andsocietal context” to the 2022-23 criteria with multiple elaborate learning outcomes underCriterion 3: “2. an ability to apply engineering design to produce solutions that meet specified needs with consideration of public health, safety, and welfare, as well as global, cultural, social, environmental, and economic factors. 3. an ability to communicate effectively with a range of audiences. 5. an ability to function effectively on a team whose members together provide leadership, create a collaborative and inclusive environment, establish goals, plan tasks, and meet objectives” [5]. These learning outcomes have
/dhe0000115.[7] I. Ajzen, “The theory of planned behavior,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, vol. 50, no. 2, pp. 179–211, Dec. 1991, doi: 10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T.[8] B. Latané and J. M. Darley, The Unresponsive Bystander: Why Doesn’t He Help? New York, NY: Appleton-Century Crofts., 1970.[9] T. S. Harding, M. J. Mayhew, C. J. Finelli, and D. D. Carpenter, “The Theory of Planned Behavior as a Model of Academic Dishonesty in Engineering and Humanities Undergraduates,” Ethics & Behavior, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 255–279, Sep. 2007, doi: 10.1080/10508420701519239.[10] M. E. Matters, C. B. Zoltowski, A. O. Brightman, and P. M. Buzzanell, “An Engineering Faculty and an Intention to Make Change for Diversity and
advisor and the young people we worked with.”In their reflections, Authors 1 and 2 describe the roles they assumed during their first researchstudies. Author 2 describes how, initially, she assumed the role of a “learner and tester,” withadvisors and colleagues' help, she gained more confidence in her position as a researcher. Author1 describes how she also used guidance from the youth participants as a learning experience.However, this could be seen as the merging of her role as a learner and her position as aresearcher on a design-based research project where participant interactions mediate changes fornew design iterations. Author 2 “When the workshop was completed, I finished everything I planned on time and got the data I wanted
] and aims to let informants’ genuine thoughts and emotionsunfold naturally.Interview StoriesThe interview stories were collected during interviews in six studies, where the context for eachstudy was a unique section of the same preservice teacher education course in a large publicuniversity in the Southeast United States. Each section was offered in a unique semester.Informants were recruited under a protocol approved by the IRB of the large public university inthe Southeast United States. To recruit informants, a researcher visited the classes, explained thepurpose of the study – to learn how preservice teachers learn to use robotics technology in K-12classrooms from videos, lesson plans, and discussions. Informants in all six studies
completing tasks on time, the graduate student andinstructor discussed a plan to help the student. We used the following points for the learningobjectives mentioned above.Table 1. Introduction to Scientific Research course assignments and grading policy Learning Assignment Points/Total objective points Scientific method Hypothesis & Aims Experimental design plans 20 points & 40 points Laboratory safety Safety quiz, Safety tour 15 points total Reading scientific Reading
study approach involves deep exploration of a specific individual, group,event, or phenomenon in its real-life context [6]. Meanwhile, multiple case studies, a variation ofthis approach, also offer several advantages as a methodology. Employing a case study isespecially helpful when the researcher addresses descriptive or explanatory questions, identifiesclearly defined cases with well-established boundaries and aims to deeply explore these cases orconduct a comparative analysis across multiple instances [7]. This conference manuscript aims toprovide guidance on when to use this approach and summarize key methodological aspectsrelated to the design, planning, analysis, interpretation, and reporting of case studies.Acknowledging the importance
be run in a single laboratory period. In a physical laboratory environment, a singlejar test would take almost three hours to complete. Students were not given any explicit recommendationsfor which doses they should run, but rather needed to use engineering skills, and results of their past teststo iteratively develop an experimental plan capable of obtaining and justifying an optimal dose ofchemicals for the process.Data Collection and AnalysisData were collected in the form of audio and video recordings of students during the entire time workingon the laboratory. Audio was collected with speaker phones placed in the center of the desk. Video wasrecorded of both the computer screen running the virtual laboratory and the students as they
necessary to develop impactful, innovative, and successfulengineering solutions [9]–[11].In addition to preparing engineering students to successfully address modern engineeringproblems, the inclusion of comprehensive engineering skills in the curriculum has implicationsfor students’ engagement and persistence in the field. Students’ engagement in their field as wellas their plans to pursue an engineering career or engineering graduate education is determined inpart by an alignment between their personal and professional interests and values in engineeringand curricular messages about what engineering practice includes. For some students, thepotential to leverage engineering for social good is a key motivation for pursuing work in thefield [12
students and an introductory course for a minor in Innovation andEntrepreneurship at Shanghai Tech University [42]. The aim of this course is to allowstudents to utilize scientific methods and critical thinking skills to collaborate with teammatesof different disciplines and solve real-world issues [42]. In higher education, researchers havefocused more on enhancing learners' competencies.Additionally, children from six institutions in Shaanxi Province have taken part in virtualworkshops focused on design thinking and STEM education [43]. Plan International has alsoreached a broad audience in implementing design thinking in STEM. Doing so has aided inreducing gender stereotypes about STEM education and has made students more comfortableexploring
framework’, ‘social medium’, and ‘participate outreach’.Figure 4d) demonstrates the bigram network related to tweets discussion online EE, where itwas observed that the education board in the central node connected with the words ‘distancelearning’, and Oklahoma State’. There are also conversations about ‘plans to keep the schoolbuilding closed’ in communication-related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Additional notablewords would be ‘institutional care fund’. These discussions were about the courses becomingonline and institute initiatives to cover the funds of the students who paid for campus coursesyet become online due to the consequences of COVID-19.Figure 4: Top bigrams for each group c) engineering profession, and d) distance learningFigure 4e
student acknowledged their positivemindset in relation to their CliftonStrength of Harmony, stating, “I’ve started to focus on just trying my best and being happy with any outcome. I realize now that my strength of harmony has a lot to play in the fact that I am being more realistic and not worrying about all the little steps” (14, R2, Fall).Another student displayed an avoidant mindset in their first reflection, stating how theirDeliberative CliftonStrength has “helped [them] to assess and avoid certain risks, like badenvironments in life” and how they can “plan ahead in [their] personal life more...by assessingpotential risks” (11, R1, Spring). This student then recognized the comfort they gain fromlooking at their
undergraduate engineering students (n = 69). In this iteration, the survey wasimplemented within a senior-level space systems design course at a large, Midwestern, historically white,research-intensive, public university. The course serves as an introduction to the engineering designprocess for space systems, including technical content such as mission planning, launch vehicleintegration, or propulsion. In addition, ethical content related to the technical material, such as spaceterritorialization, climate change, and nuclear propulsion, were incorporated into the lesson plansthroughout the semester. This particular course was chosen as the sample for our study due to severalmembers of our research team making up the class instructional team.The survey
criteria for success and constraints on materials, time, or cost. 3-5 ETS1-2: Generate and compare multiple possible solutions to a problem based on 13 how well each is likely to meet the criteria and constraints of the problem. 3-5 ETS1-3: Plan and carry out fair tests in which variables are controlled and failure 22 points are considered to identify aspects of a model or prototype that can be improved MS ETS1-1: Define the criteria and constraints of a design problem with sufficient 22 precision to ensure a successful solution taking into account relevant scientific principles taking into account potential impacts on people and the natural environment that may limit possible
)? if they are a valued member of the team. The RPP establishes rou- Siloed Decision Making (SD): tines that promote collabo- Leadership (PI/Co-PIs) making What team norms, if any, rative decision making and decisions about planning and were developed? Are they guard against power imbal- implementation without soliciting followed? How? ances input or feedback from wider team. Are all team voices included RPP members establish Recommended RPP Improvements in collaborative decision norms of interaction that (RR): recommendations from either making? If yes, how? If no, support collaborative deci- partner on ideas to improve the part- please describe your sion making and equitable nership
interviews). In addition, the researchers observed six instructional sessions (twoto four hours in duration) during the camps to record field notes that informed interviewquestions and identified relevant thematic elements; these observations also providedtriangulation for interpreting the interviews. In this way, the researchers could analyze theinstructors’ challenges and instructional decision making as they formatively processed theirpedagogical effectiveness. Student artifacts were observed during the classroom observations tounderstand the curricular fidelity of the planned activities [38-40]. This study was approved byStony Brook University’s Institutional Review Board (#574341), and voluntary consent wasprovided by study participants.Data
Science and Engineering (CSE) majors from eight CSEcourses at a large, research-intensive university located in the United States. Five questions about thestudent experience in the current course and their plans for the next course were embedded into largersurveys administered in each of the participating courses. In this paper, we focus on student responses tothe following survey questions: “What are barriers that might prevent you from taking the next coursein this sequence?” and “What makes you feel good about your plans to take the next course in thissequence?” Each of the participating courses serves as a prerequisite course for at least one subsequentcourse (for example: Intro to CS I is a prerequisite for Intro to CS II).We address the
plan to collect data that will help usbetter understand how situational factors might serve as a barrier to epistemic negotiations andhow they interact with the CCE norms.Barrier 2: Differences in Disciplinary KnowledgeThe first epistemic question posed in this meeting was regarding the impact of noise in a casestudy. Case study is a research method that ”...investigates a phenomenon (the ’case’) in depth andwithin its real-world context” [18, p.15]. Once the case has been defined, the researcher definesthe boundaries of the case. These boundaries provide a clear scope for the project and help theresearcher make decisions about what data to include [18].As Team X’s original plan was to use a case study methodology to study traditional, in
forethought phase occurs before learners begin work on the task andinfluences how they engage in the task and their ability to succeed in it. In this phase, thelearners analyze the task, assess their motivational beliefs, and plan strategies to successfullyobtain their goals and complete the task. In the performance phase, the learners undertake thetask, using self-control to adhere to their planned strategies and self-observation to monitor theirprogress and evaluate their work. In the final phase, self-reflection, learners use self-judgmentand self-reaction to reflect on the effectiveness of the strategies they used during the performancephase and their need for future improvements. Causal attributions only affect self-feedbackpositively when
focus” and “coverage” [2] – which may be unintended resultsowing to a lack of methodological tools for PBL. Beyond supporting instructors’ planning of PBL,we envision that the materials instructors produce when using this toolkit might contribute todiscussion and the sharing of PBL materials among fellow engineering instructors. ImplementingPBL into the classroom presents an opportunity to provide rich, authentic engineering experiencesfor students, but implementation is a notoriously difficult task [3], [4]. We envision a future whereeducators collaborate in the sharing of PBL resources with their peers, thereby lowering thebarriers to adoption. The toolkit described in this paper represents an initial step toward this goal.The primary items
ORsearched individually, long range planning OR organizational development OR strategic planning OR change strategies OR educational change OR pedagogical change OR curricular change OR cultural change OR culture changeand results were AND engineering education OR computer science education OR ((engineering OR computer science ) AND education)exported to a citation ANDmanager (Zotero) in higher education OR college OR university OR post-secondary OR postsecondary OR post secondary OR tertiary