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
things make you stressed? Why? Be detailed. Have you Mindfulness used mindfulness strategies in the past? Which ones? What are some mindfulness strategies you plan to use moving forward? How do you think these strategies will help you manage your stress? 4 - Belonging, Part 1: What identities are important to you? What do you feel is the Identity, Meaning, & most important part of your identities? How about the least? How Purpose does this identity contribute to meaning & purpose you have for your life? Part 2: Has this semester's focus on mental health in engineering shifted your
, opticalsciences and engineering, software engineering, systems and industrial engineering, and ourinterdisciplinary first-year and capstone design courses. The teaching assistants were fromengineering and mathematics departments. The courses where innovations were implementedspanned from first-year undergraduate courses to fourth-year and master’s level courses. Many,but not all, of these courses, included a focus on engineering design and team-based projects.After the initial professional development retreat, we analyzed the resulting innovation plans andnotes from debriefing and/or check-in sessions with participants and compiled an inventory ofpractical asset-based strategies that were designed or adapted by instructors, which is the focusof this
)? 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
. However, some faculty members disagreedor strongly disagreed with every item, indicating a broad range of reported self-efficacy. Facultyfelt least able to engage in class discussions on topics related to race, ethnicity, or gender (M =3.2), and to perform activities that disrupted their extant lesson plans like stopping class toaddress emergent issues of student belonging (M = 3.3) or deviating from planned class contentto discuss current topics affecting students' lives (M = 3.3). Mild trepidation was also expressedat the prospect of using student feedback to make course policy changes (M = 3.3). Thesepatterns suggest that mild uncertainty about one’s ability to perform these actions do not deeplyimpede faculty’s decisions to take up equity
collaborators in the research [9].Group Level Assessment (GLA) is a process that guides participants through brainstorming theirchallenges, thematically analyzing their responses, and developing action plans to address theissues they have identified [10]. The seven-step process of a GLA is shown below in Table 1.Table 1. Description of Group Level Assessment process steps Step Description Climate Setting GLA process is described to participants Generating Participants respond to prompts placed around room on boards Appreciating Participants make notes on the boards to analyze the initial responses Reflecting Participants individually analyze the data and begin to find shared themes Understanding Participants share
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
plan tocontinue and make it an integral part of the exams in the future.MethodsThree courses taught by the instructors were selected for adding partial credit during exams inthe Blackboard-based automated grading system. The courses were Thermodynamics (foursections), Engineering Statistics (one section), and Dynamics (one section). These are coursestaken in the student’s Junior year. Engineering Statistics is a required course for all engineeringmajors. Thermodynamics is required for Mechanical and Chemical engineering. OnlyMechanical and Civil engineering students are required to take Dynamics. In Thermodynamicsand Engineering Statistics, students did their homework assignments on Blackboard, whilestudents used Mastering Engineering for
engineering students to work effectively in teams, writing that“because of the increasing complexity and scale of systems-based engineering problems, there isa growing need to pursue collaborations with multidisciplinary teams of experts across multiplefields” [1, pp. 34–35]. ABET has similarly dedicated one of its seven student outcomes toteamwork, wording it as: “An ability to function effectively on a team whose members togetherprovide leadership, create a collaborative and inclusive environment, establish goals, plan tasks,and meet objectives” [2]. Research studies have also repeatedly underlined the importance ofdeveloping engineering students’ abilities to work in teams to meet industry needs [3], [4].As a result, there has been an increased
inclusion (20 items), 5) mentorship experience (18 items), 6) programsatisfaction (11 items), 7) STEM-related future plans (4 items), and 8) demographic information(7 items). An additional ninth section was designed to capture the unique experiences undertakenby RET participants [13]. MERCII survey has gone through a number of iterations in an effort tocreate a set of tools applicable for all [11].Sections 2 through 6 of the survey were analyzed for this study. These sections consisted ofLikert-type questions with the following scale: not at all =1; very little = 2; somewhat = 3; quitea bit = 4; a great deal = 5.Data CollectionThe instrument was administered to six ERCs between Summer 2021 and Spring 2022. Theinstrument was shared with center
engagement guide based on patterns found in the pilotsurvey data, the research team plans to implement stakeholder interviews with students to gainfeedback and further insights into their decision-making processes and what they believe wouldimprove the usefulness of a co-curricular engagement guide. The interviews will allow the researchteam to explore and test preliminary hypotheses about what factors students consider when makingengagement decisions.Preliminary Survey ResultsWe present preliminary patterns of common pilot survey responses in Table 2 and Figure 2.Table 2. Common responses in sections of the survey. Participants could select multiple choices. Parenthesisindicates number of respondents. Co-Curricular Categories Academic or
know how to use the equipment.The new lab was to assign students to work as a group to design experiments to measure thespecific heat of five different widely used construction materials: metal, glass, wood, plastics, andconcrete (Fig. 2) with the lab equipment they have used in previous labs with the theory ofconservation of energy. The new lab was separated into three steps in a three-week period.During the first week, students were asked to plan the experiment, which included the purpose ofthe lab, the list of lab equipment, list of lab materials, detailed experiment procedures, the data tobe collected, and the goals to reach, in a group of three or four students.During the second week, the group worked on their designed experiments
´olica de Chile Gabriel Astudillo is Coordinator for Measurement and Evaluation at the Engineering School in Pontificia Universidad Cat´olica de Chile (PUC-Chile). Gabriel received an MA in Social Sciences from Universidad de Chile. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 Encouraging Teamwork after the PandemicType of paper: Work in progress (WIP).AbstractThe Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) proposes that one of thestudent outcomes that engineers must have is "an ability to function effectively on a team whosemembers together provide leadership, create a collaborative and inclusive environment, establishgoals, plan tasks, and meet objectives" [1
influences from socializers mayinteract with students’ motivation to persist in STEM. Alternatively, future work couldexperiment with facilitating these interactions to improve motivation. Further empirical insightsthat unpack the dynamics of different socializer-interactions can build a deeper understanding ofthe impact of socializers to inform research and practice.References[1] J. P. Martin, D. R. Simmons, and S. L. Yu, “The Role of Social Capital in the Experiences of Hispanic Women Engineering Majors,” J. Eng. Educ., vol. 102, no. 2, pp. 227–243, 2013, doi: 10.1002/jee.20010.[2] National Science Foundation, “U.S. National Science Foundation 2022-2026 Strategic Plan,” 2022.[3] E. McGee and L. Bentley, “The equity ethic
opportunities for student-led change by encouraging students to identify areas that need improvement and then conductresearch and develop plans for improvements. This involves defining specific and measurablegoals that align with students’ perspectives. The project underscores collaboration, fosteringco-creation, and student- led leadership, diverging from other top-down methods by elevatingstudents’ voices and promoting student agency by positioning students as leaders, rather thanrecipients, of institutional change projects.Against this backdrop, this paper asks: how might storytelling methods, that shift the role ofstudents from research participant to research collaborator, provide insight into students.experiences?Storytelling stands at the
exploratory mixed-methods study on implementing assignment choice as a meansof students planning a path to meet the course learning objectives 7,8 . The choices in thecurriculum will be fully integrated into Canvas, the Learning Management System, and the coursegrade calculator available to students. A customized course roadmap will be used for the studentsto visually plan their path through the assignments and to their individual path to success. Thisapproach applies to students’ own motivation, whether intrinsic or extrinsic.BackgroundOur study delves into a comprehensive analysis of data spanning from 2012 to the present day.The initial five years of our dataset revealed a persistent trend within our CS-1 courses,characterized by grade
prepare for future work in which we plan to evaluatethe nature of the stress that students experience as they progress through our project-basedprograms. Why is it that after their first semester-long project our students’ experience changessuch that they end up reporting similar stress and depression levels as the students studied byJensen and Cross?Future work will thus examine performance changes as a function of time and population size,investigation of the nature of the stresses students are facing in project-based programs, andtriangulating and supporting quantitative results with qualitative data.Another limitation of this study that could be addressed in future research is non-respondentselection bias. Finally, additional work is needed
relatively brief peer comments, so weconsidered other models. In our search of frameworks and rubrics, we observed that a significantamount of the peer feedback literature is based in medical education because commonpedagogical practices in the field, such as clinical rotations, necessitate immediate feedback froman instructor. Still, their approaches can likely be applied to other group or team-based learningsettings. A well-known approach to evaluating teamwork behaviors includes the TeamUP rubric.The TeamUP rubric was developed in the form of a Likert-scale survey for midwifery studentsand includes five domains: planning, environment, facilitating the contributions of others,managing conflict, and contributing to the team project [20]. Although
emphasis on Black students) with items relatedto ethnic identity [17]–[19]. While making the CAM survey items more appropriate to Latinaengineering students, this approach would still leave the two research stages disjointed andunconnected since ethnic identity is a narrowly focused construct that fails to encompass allrelevant parameters. Greater coherence is achieved by incorporating aspects of the CCWMmodel in the first-stage survey instrument. Using Hiramori’s [20] quantitative implementation ofthe CCWM as a guide to modify CAM survey items related to racial identity [5], we willleverage the quantitative first stage results for planning the qualitative CCWM framework in thesecond stage of our study. Efforts were also taken to
removed from our networks, anyfindings in our research will automatically apply to minorities as the vast majority of ourstudent demographic is Hispanic.Future WorkWe have information on the students’ grade classification at enrollment, we plan to use that infuture iterations of the models. We aim to increase the number of predictor data we haveavailable and grade the effect of each of these predictors in guiding the outcome of ourstudents in the program. Such predictors include nationality, first-generation status,socioeconomic status, employment, scholarship status, military participation, and firstlanguage. We are working closely with university administrators and student offices to obtainmore student data for our efforts. We are also making
Room was often at capacity during tutoring hours. Peertutors are a low-cost, community building way to provide more resources for student success.The implementation of ICPT has improved the peer tutoring program at University of Portland,and we plan to continue implementing ICPT in other classes and engineering disciplines.Paper Type: Evidence-Based PracticeKey Words: tutoring, peer learning, conceptual understanding, multidisciplinaryIntroductionPeer tutoring has been used extensively in the past 20 years, and many studies have shown that itis beneficial to student learning [1]-[5]. Peer tutoring is particularly helpful in the first two yearsof engineering, when most students leave engineering for other majors [6], [7]. Peer tutoring
writing phases) as identified from the motivationsurvey. Additionally, we are planning on doing a longitudinal assessment of doctoral student motivationto see how student motivation changes as the doctoral students progress through their doctoral degreeprogram.AcknowledgementsThis work was made possible by a U.S. Department of Education Graduate Assistance in Areas ofNational Need (GAANN) Grant Number P200A210109 and by a NSF Innovations in Graduate Education(IGE) Program [IGE DGE#2224724] grant. 5References[1] Spaulding, L. S., & Rockinson-Szapkiw, A. J. (2012). Hearing their voices: Factors doctoral candidates attribute to