semester, the program was opened to all faculty at the EEdepartment (total of 25 faculty). No faculty opted out, which allowed more course options forstudents to choose from.4-Pedagogy Training of Student Observers: Volunteering students were enrolled in a learningmodule on teaching and learning best practices on the Canvas learning management system,covering topics such as backward design and assessment, observation practices, and givingconstructive feedback. All handouts and training materials were provided within that Canvasmodule. The students were required to attend a one-hour training session on how to observe andevaluate teaching effectiveness and how to provide constructive feedback to faculty members.The training session was offered
Paper ID #42487Engineering Students’ Engagement and Learning Outcomes: A TypologicalApproachDr. Qin Liu, University of Toronto Dr. Qin Liu is Senior Research Associate with the Institute for Studies in Transdisciplinary Engineering Education and Practice, Faculty of Applied Science and Engineering, University of Toronto, Canada. Her research interests include engineering students’ learning experiences, competency development, and career development; student data analytics; and scholarship of teaching and learning.Dr. Greg Evans P.Eng., University of Toronto GREG EVANS PhD, P.Eng, FCEA, FAAAS is the Director of the Institute
systematically identify,evaluate, and synthesize the available instruments for measuring doctoral students' mentoringrelationships with advisors or mentors. Future research and instrument development in this fieldwould be guided by a thorough grasp of the current instruments, their psychometric qualities, andthe gaps in the literature that such a review would provide. 2.0 METHODS2.1 ProtocolThe best practice guidelines and reporting items for the establishment of scoping reviewprotocols by Peters et al. [19] will be followed in the construction of the scoping reviewprocedure. The methodical and reporting quality of scoping reviews depend on a systematicapproach to searching, screening, and reporting, which is
Studies, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 13–26, 1 2002. [Online]. Available: https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rvst20[36] M. Kargarmoakhar, M. Ross, Z. Hazari, S. Secules, M. A. Weiss, M. Georgiopoulos, K. Christensen, and T. Solis, “The Impact of a Community of Practice Scholarship Program on Students’ Computing Identity,” ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 9 2021. [Online]. Available: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3623615[37] M. Ross, E. Litzler, and J. Lopez, “Meeting students where they are: A virtual computer science education research (cser) experience for undergraduates (reu),” in Proceedings of the 52nd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, ser. SIGCSE ’21. New York, NY, USA
entrepreneurship research, vol. 1999, no. 1, pp. 73–87, 1999.[15] A. Naktiyok, C. Nur Karabey, and A. Caglar Gulluce, “Entrepreneurial self-efficacy and entrepreneurial intention: the Turkish case,” International entrepreneurship and management journal, vol. 6, pp. 419–435, 2010.[16] F. Wilson, J. Kickul, and D. Marlino, “Gender, entrepreneurial self–efficacy, and entrepreneurial career intentions: Implications for entrepreneurship education,” Entrepreneurship theory and practice, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 387–406, 2007.[17] J. Kickul, F. Wilson, D. Marlino, and S. D. Barbosa, “Are misalignments of perceptions and self‐efficacy causing gender gaps in entrepreneurial intentions among our nation’s teens?,” Journal of Small Business and
her substantial experience supporting students with disabilities, she has assisted faculty members in redesigning instructional content and syllabi to ensure digital accessibility. Furthermore, Elnara has conducted training sessions for instructors and textbook authors to enhance the representation of students with disabilities both in classroom settings and within textbooks. She is a Graduate Research Assistant in the Technology Leadership and Innovation program at Purdue University.Mr. Shawn Farrington, Purdue University Shawn is currently a Senior Lecturer at the Polytechnic Institute at Purdue University. He coordinates the core design thinking course as part of the Freshman Experience, teaches his sections, trains
large.Literature ReviewIn the past decade, there has been significant research aimed at assessing the teamwork skills ofSTEM students through the modification of course materials, the introduction of new techniques,and the implementation of technology-driven projects, as well as replacing traditional individualassignments with cross-disciplinary projects [7], [8]. A study on the impact of an NSF-supportedSTEM scholarship program revealed that a one-credit course focusing on teamwork significantlyimproved students' presentation skills and interpersonal confidence [9]. However, the projectwork was deemed too time-consuming for a one-hour credit course, and the issue of unevenwork distribution among team members remained unresolved. In another study, an
studies.In addition, our review shows that the primary use of CIs in engineering education is to gaugestudents' understanding and to uncover any prevailing misconceptions. It also revealed that thepredominant use of CIs is in undergraduate education, accounting for 90% of the studiesexamined. However, there is need for studies that examine the use of CIs to examine studentconceptual understanding at graduate level as researchers have shown that students still havemisconceptions even after graduation. For example, Maries and Li [30, 31] emphasize the criticalneed to examine the impact of misconceptions at the graduate level, recognizing thatmisconceptions persist at all educational levels. Furthermore, our review highlights a significantresearch gap
excellence in teaching and learning [5]; (2) the absence of astandardized accessibility curriculum within computer science education; (3) a lack ofestablished best practices for accessibility; and (4) a considerable learning curve for educatorsadapting content to be fully accessible. These challenges suggest not only variability inimplementation but also a critical gap in the standardization of accessible educational practicesacross the field. Additionally, these challenges have been made even more difficult in the onlinelearning environment, where digital accessibility issues increase considerably. Despite thiscomprehensive discussion, these two studies demonstrate how little has been researched aboutthe pedagogical practices employed to make
. A review of fundamentals, best practices and experiences,” International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM), 13, pp. 909-922, 2019.[28] T. Litzinger, L.R. Lattuca, R. Hadgraft, & W. Newstetter, “Engineering education and the development of expertise,” Journal of engineering education, vol. 100, no. 1, pp. 123-150, 2011.[29] P. Tynjälä, R.T. Salminen, T. Sutela, A. Nuutinen, & S. Pitkänen, “Factors related to study success in engineering education,” European Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 221-231, 2005.[30] B.A. Brown, J.M. Reveles, & G.J. Kelly, “Scientific literacy and discursive identity: A theoretical framework for understanding science learning
teamwork in collaborative research settings?" To comprehensively address themain research question, the study will explore the following sub-questions: • RQ1: What are the perceived weaknesses of teamwork as experienced by students? • RQ2: How do students in URPs navigate and resolve conflicts within their teams? • RQ3: What are the strengths of teamwork as perceived by students in URPs?By addressing these questions, the study aims to provide a nuanced understanding of the roleand impact of teamwork in URPs. It seeks to offer insights into best practices for fosteringeffective teamwork in such programs and to highlight the potential areas for improvement inteam dynamics. This, in turn, can inform the design and implementation of future URPs
-based approaches to understanding this population. Dina is interested in understanding how first-generation college students author their identities as engineers and negotiate their multiple identities in the current culture of engineering. Dina has won several awards including the 2022-2023 Outstanding Research Publication Award by the American Educational Research Asso- ciation (AERA) Division I, 2018 ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference Best Diversity Paper Award, 2019 College of Engineering Outstanding Graduate Student Research Award and the Alliance for Graduate Education and the Professoriate (AGEP) Distinguished Scholar Award. Dina’s dissertation pro- posal was selected as part of the top 3 in the 2018
Paper ID #39604Team dynamics and cultural competency in a first-year engineeringclassroomDr. Jutshi Agarwal, University of Cincinnati Jutshi Agarwal is a Post Doctoral Fellow with the Department of Engineering and Computng Education at the University of Cincinnati. She has a Doctoral degrree in Engineering Education and a Master’s degree in Aerospace Engineering from University of Cincinnati, and a Bachelor’s degree in Aerospace Engineering from SRM University, India. Her research areas of interest are graduate student professional development for a career in academia, preparing future faculty, and using AI tools to solve
and scholarly approach. The structured framework has guided the comprehensiveexamination of relevant literature in a manner reflective of best practices in scholarly writing. Thereview used research databases, search strings, and inclusion criteria for an unbiased search toprovide a narrative description that elaborates meaning full story about the existing research in thisfield.Search ProcedureMultiple search databases were queried to select papers to write a literature survey. EBSCO host,Wiley Library, and IEEE Xplore databases were selected because they provide the advanced searchoption to apply practically identical search strings to select papers to ensure that the chosen papersalign with the objectives and focus of your research. EBSCO
Engineering Education and earned her Ph.D. from Arizona State University, in Engineering Education. After gaining her Ph.D., she worked as a postdoctoral associate at Florida International University in the School of Universal Computing, Construction, and Engineering Education and a visiting assistant professor at Virginia Tech in the Department of Engineering Education. Her research interests center on the concept of sense of belonging, graduate education, mixed-methods and synthesis research. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 [Work-in-Progress] Sense of Belonging in STEM Higher Education: Developing a Scoping Review Protocol and StrategyIntroductionIn STEM higher
same students also commented that they feel more motivated to learnusing an interactive textbook, that the textbook increased their interest in the class, and that thetextbook also made the class more efficient.Another study from 2009 was conducted to see the impact on learning from a web-basedinteractive statics course [20]. The study consisted of 110 students, and researchers trackedstudent use of interactive exercises, referred to as tutors, for each module. They then comparedthe grades of quizzes for each module for those who used low (one to six), medium (seven to 14),and high (15 to 23) numbers of tutors per module. There was a statistically significant increase inperformance from the students who had medium- and high-use of the tutors
participant experiences and understanding [1]. CI is most commonly used for thepretesting of surveys and can be used for educational research, but the method can also beused to understand cognition, such as by having participants think aloud while problemsolving [1]. For the purposes of this paper, we will consider CI as a means of pretesting asurvey for research, using CI for validation purposes while the survey is in drafting stages. CIcan be used as an independent method, such as during think aloud studies of educationalmaterials, however we are most concerned here with CI techniques which impact the design ofwritten surveys for research. As a technique, CI has seen widespread use in this way acrossmany fields including psychology, education
Alliance members are still figuringout how research will inform the selection and/or design of the high impact practices and in turncontribute back into the collective knowledge. Participants’ comments range from lookingentirely to external sources to co-creating equity solutions.Ongoing CommunicationsOngoing Communications involves a range of approaches to strategically disseminate ideas andinformation and to educate stakeholders and decision makers to advance equity. The lack of timeto discuss problems and solutions during meetings is a major obstacle for the Alliance. Membersreflected that they are not able to have meaningful conversations about the issues they face anddevelop solutions that can help the Alliance move forward. This lack of
behaviorsfocused on questioning techniques [21], instructional frameworks for integration [22], the impactof disciplinary background [23], and professional development [24].A smaller portion of studies measured the impact of the intervention on changing behaviors (9%)or increasing knowledge (15%). This included measuring the performance of the final prototypemeeting design criteria [25] [26]. Others focused on measuring increased spatial thinking [27][28], changes in science and engineering practices [43], and increased understanding of scienceconcepts [29] [26] [30]. Only [31] evaluated engineering concepts.Table 1. Identifying Trends in Research Aims for Middle School Engineering Education Categories
area of study as they serve as anoptimal environment for visualization, configurations, versatility, and data collection. One racingsimulator in particular was widely used among researchers and that is TORCS, more detailsdiscussed in theme IV. Because of the ever-growing AI technology, there is a need for furtherresearch in the optimization of AI agents, using racing games as a platform for testing anddevelopment [6]. By incorporating additional research, we’re able to bridge the gap betweentheoretical concept and practical concepts, offering a unique and engaging medium for engineersto further apprehend their knowledge of AI principles.A systematic literature review (SLR) on the implementation of AI/ML algorithms in racing gamesfor
framework We approached the stories using an interpretive lens. Therefore, this work is grounded inpostmodernism as we represented stories beyond traditional norms of dissemination. We added somelayers to complete the narratives without changing the actual stories. Based on the experiences ofmarginalization common to Black students navigating engineering, this project is theoretically framed inCritical Race and Role Strain Theories. Critical Race Theory (CRT) provides a framework forchallenging the ways in which race and racism implicitly and explicitly impact social structures, practices,and discourses; it has also been used to understand the experiences of Black graduate students navigatingengineering environments (Crenshaw, 1991; Ladson
Association for Undergradu- ate Education at Research Universities, a consortium that brings together research university leaders with expertise in the theory and practice of undergraduate education and student success. In addition, he is a fellow at the John N. Gardner Institute for Excellence in Undergraduate Education. Professor Heileman’s work on analytics related to student success has led to the development of a theory of curricular analytics that is now being used broadly across higher education in order to inform improvement efforts related to curricular efficiency, curricular equity, and student progression. A website facilitating access to curricular analytics tools is available at: CurricularAnalytics.org.Kian G
Michigan. Her current research focuses on idea development and ideation tools, divergent thinking, and engineering curricular practices and culture. Her research interests include front-end design practices, sociotechnical knowledge and skills in engineering, and queer student experiences in engineering. Their work is motivated by their passion for and experiences with inclusive teaching and holistic mentorship of students, seeking to reimagine what an engineer looks like, does, and who they are, especially for queer folks, women, and people of color, through empowerment, collaboration, and co-development for a more equitable world. Shannon is also a Senior Graduate Facilitator and Lab Manager with the Center for
models for studentdevelopment [6–10], there is limited published research evidence to help transfer findings fromone project to another. As cohort programs continue to increase in popularity, there is a need todocument effective practices for engineering student support. Here we focus on a key componentof many cohort programs, the development of social capital within engineering. Social capital, orthe ways students’ relationships support their development as engineers, is an asset-basedframing that can help researchers explore equitable development and deploy social resources in acohort program [11–13]. Understanding how undergraduate engineering students make and userelationships allows for the institutional and programmatic changes that best
relationship is different [7]. A healthy ecosystem, in our framework, is one inwhich everyone is valued and supported according to their own individual needs. These needsare greatly impacted by systems of social oppression, which disproportionately affect ourstudents. We also recognize that these systems of oppression are active within the universityitself, and even within our own classrooms. To build STEM educational systems that prioritizeequity and justice, we require the development of the critical consciousness [see 8] necessary forfaculty to begin to understand how systems of oppression are reproduced, albeit oftenunintentionally, within their own classrooms. To this end, the Eco-STEM project has developedCommunities of Practice for faculty and
Education, vol. 44, no. 3, p. 249, 2010.[4] M. Hernandez-de-Menendez, A. V. Guevara, J. C. T. Martinez, D. H. Alcantara and R. Morales-Mendez, "Active learning in engineering education. A review of fundamentals, best practices and experiences," International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM), vol. 13, pp. 909-922, 2019.[5] D. Drane, M. Micari and G. Light, "Students as Teachers: Effectiveness of a Peer-led STEM Learning Programme over 10 Years," Educational Research and Evaluation, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 210-230, 2014.[6] J. R. Reisel, M. R. Jablonski, E. Munson and H. Hosseini, "Peer-led team learning in mathematics courses for freshmen engineering and computer science students," Journal of STEM Education
career.The outcome of these highly competitive proposal submissions can affect the productivity andinterests of researchers at all career stages from graduate students to tenured department heads.Beyond the individual factors, funded proposals can influence the direction and growth of eachdiscipline and general scientific knowledge and priorities based on the tendency for fundedresearch to be published in highly ranked journals and to be highly cited [1]. The outcome ofthese grant proposal submissions is typically reliant on peer review. However, reviewers oftenreceive minimal training on best practices of peer review, and the criteria upon which reviewersmake their recommendations are poorly understood [2].These issues are likely in part to blame
., vol. 62, pp. 142–148, 2019.[22] C. Cartwright, M. Stevens, and K. Schneider, “Constructing the learning outcomes with intercultural assessment: A 3-year study of a graduate study abroad and glocal experience programs,” Front. Interdiscip. J. Study Abroad, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 82–105, 2021.[23] L. Krishnan and L. Jin, “Long-Term Impact of Study Abroad on Intercultural Development,” Perspect. ASHA Spec. Interest Groups, no. Query date: 2022-06-01 18:56:09, 2022, doi: 10.1044/2021_PERSP-21-00128.[24] N. Pearse, “An illustration of deductive analysis in qualitative research,” in 18th European conference on research methodology for business and management studies, 2019, p. 264.[25] V. Braun and V. Clarke, “Thematic analysis
social realities,provides accurate accounts of their lived experiences, and provides useful extensions of theory(here, how engineering ethics and DEI connect in engineering). This paper thus explores andelucidates research quality considerations associated with our research design andimplementation. Identifying what strategies promote research quality is, in itself, a critical topic 2of discussion in engineering education. By considering and elucidating our strategies to promoteresearch quality whilst investigating mental models, we hope to provide guidance for othereducators who perform similar qualitative research studies.In the overarching
in flipped classroom methods, the team includes a third-personeducational researcher (Andrea Medina) focusing on high-impact classroom practices. There arethree instructors in the study: Instructor A, Instructor B and Instructor C. Instructor A is the leadinstructional designer and learned FC and active learning from the Transforming STEMTeaching Faculty Learning Program (FLP) hosted virtually by the University of California,Berkley. Instructor A has publications in iterations of the flipped classroom model [20], [21].Instructor C received a grant on diversity-centric learning and project-based learning. InstructorA and C taught years of courses in the flipped classroom modality before the study. Instructor Bhas less training than Instructor