Paper ID #38325Exploring how Students Grapple with Agency in Open-Ended EngineeringProblemsDr. Corey T. Schimpf, University at Buffalo, SUNY Corey Schimpf is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Engineering Education at the University at Buffalo, SUNY. His lab focuses on engineering design, advancing research methods, and technology innovations to support learning in complex domains. Major research strands include: (1) analyzing how expertise develops in engineering design across the continuum from novice pre-college students to prac- ticing engineers, (2) advancing engineering design research by integrating new
require anappropriate level of personal disclosure to develop trust [1]. Many students often discuss theirfamilies and romantic interests with their peers, similar how to many of us might shareinformation about our spouses and children with our colleagues. These pieces of informationestablish points of commonality and difference that help us relate to each other, which facilitatesour ability to work together toward some common goal.For heterosexual, cisgender students in STEM, the routine disclosure of information that revealstheir gender identity or sexual orientation, like information about potential romantic interests, isquite benign [2]. However, LGBTQ students typically face pressures in STEM contexts to hidetheir sexual and gender
examined students’ creative mindsets.Specifically, creative mindsets refer to whether students believe their creativity is innate oradaptive. We measured engineering students’ creative mindsets because creative mindsets are animportant component in both engineering and entrepreneurship and are expected to be related tostudents’ entrepreneurial self-efficacy beliefs (Cropley, 2016; Walton, 2003). In the presentstudy, overall, we created the ESE-E following multiple iterations and theoretical and empiricalguidelines. Therefore, we expected that the scales would demonstrate high reliability andvalidity.Research Questions As such, we had three research questions: 1. What are the factors of the ESE-E scales? 2. Are students’ creative
how marginalization andinclusion in communication operates both at the level of students and teachers, but also through physicalclassroom settings and the larger educational context. However, there is still a need for further research tocreate more equitable STEM classrooms. To that end, our study seeks to gain firsthand insight fromwomen and gender-diverse students and faculty members regarding their experiences in academia.Participants share perspectives and strategies for overcoming experiences of marginalization and creatingmore welcoming and inclusive learning environments in introductory engineering courses. Thisqualitative study seeks to answer the following questions: (1) What types of marginalization do womenstudents experience while
probably not most professors' favorite part of a teaching job. They could spendtheir time and effort on more productive work, such as searching for new applications anddeveloping new lecture topics. In addition, manual grading does not provide instant feedback tothe students on their performance and understanding. With the ever-evolving technology, moreand more homework has moved online in recent years, and many online homework problemscome with automated grading.Research on auto-grading has shown mixed results ranging from being helpful to students tohaving no significant effect. Arora et al. show that online homework significantly improvedstudents’ grades in a statics course [1]. Multiple attempts at homework problems have beenshown to improve
framework was based upon theories in cognitive load, transfer, and instructionalresponsiveness. Through the exploratory case study design and pre- and post-interviews withcourse instructors, three main themes emerged: (1) cognitive challenges were often related to theabstraction and transfer of engineering concepts and skills; (2) comprehension was facilitated byfostering collaborative learning and autonomy; and (3) there were frequent timing issues withinstructional pacing and differential rates of task completion. Findings suggest that STEMintegration requires content mastery, pedagogical content knowledge, and attention towardstransfer, particularly in the teaching of engineering design to reduce cognitive load. Scientificconcepts such as energy
Saldana’s work (2019).The following table introduces all the themes that we transformed into masks to explore the marginalizedexperiences of Black PhD students at PWIs. The reason we chose to represent the narratives by usingmasks are-we anticipated the magnitude of the audio-visual elements of emotions and metaphors ofmarginalization through different “masks” will prove to be profound tools for reflection. Also, masks canhelp enhance a theatrical experience if we perform the narratives as ethno-theatre.Table 1: Masks and all the identity hats description Masks (Themes were transformed into masks) Definition of each identity-related mask Model Student Mask Navigating as Black student at Predominantly
thatincorporating more use cases in the structuring of coursework may facilitate the integration ofCT into the engineering curriculum by improving the recognition of CT concepts.BackgroundIn today’s technology-driven world, computers are integral in expanding our capabilities acrossvarious sectors. Computing technologies are transforming sectors, and in the new industriallandscape, solving complex engineering problems calls for the use of computer systems as wellas cross-functional teams [1]. Given that computer-based solutions are becoming increasinglyintegral to the engineering problem-solving and design process, computational thinking (CT)should be a fundamental skill for engineering students so that they can effectively leverage thesetools.Engineers
tailored support. Through C2WEST, Black students could also further realizeand conceptualize the access they have to their own aspirations regarding future career and lifegoals.IntroductionIn this theory paper, the aspirational capital of Black students will be examined through theC2WEST framework. A variety of research has examined the aspirations of Black students inSTEM in addition to other types of capital that Black students bring to the fields [1]–[4]. Yossodefines aspirational capital as the “ability to maintain hopes and dreams for the future, even inthe face of real and perceived barriers” [5, p. 77]. In a systematic review, Denton et al. [2]examined twenty-eight different studies that mentioned aspirational capital among
further research into how students learn to frame engineering designproblems and what role framing plays in their professional formation.Introduction and Research PurposeDeveloping the ability to design solutions to problems is key for engineering students learning tobe professionals [1]. Many design experiences happen in the first-year and senior year courses,though increasingly they are being incorporated into courses along the entire program [2]–[4].Instructors must make many decisions when developing design challenges, not all of which areclear. For instance, in senior capstone design, faculty commonly contend with ABETrequirements, ethics, project management, appropriate scope, appropriate technical content, andteam dynamics [5]–[7]. With
. Questions about how the cohort program helped the students promptedreflections on their experiences with the different facets of the program. These experiences wereused to create themes representing the shared sentiment regarding the specific components of theprogram. Findings are presented to illustrate the importance of social capital developmentopportunities to first-year undergraduate students.IntroductionThere has been an emergence of extracurricular programming to support engineering students’pathways to degree attainment. These include minority enrichment programs [1], internshipprograms [2], undergraduate research experiences [3], and scholarship-based cohort programs [4,5]. While scholarship-based cohort programs are well-established
bridge the theory-to-practice gap in engineering education by serving as an ambassador for empirically driven educational practices. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2023 Criteria Conundrum: Engineering Students’ Beliefs about the Role of Competing Criteria in Process Safety JudgementsIntroductionEngineering practitioners are responsible for making judgements related to process safetysituations, which could impact the probability of a safety incident occurring. These incidents canhave devastating repercussions, potentially resulting in injury or fatality of personnel [1].Incident reports and literature suggest that many of these incidents may be attributed to poorjudgements where
need for transformativemindsets and complementary tools for student-centred learning and related teachingopportunities. Engineering and science students need to develop a range of competencies beyondsimply technical skills to address the complexity of societal challenges often referred to as“wicked” problems. Recognizing that students in science, technology, engineering, andmathematics (STEM) fields require complementary skills such as communication, collaboration,and creativity to engage meaningfully with stakeholders and address a challenge within a givencontext is the first step; learning how to effectively teach these skills (i.e., competency-basededucation) is a wicked problem in and of itself [1], [2].In addition to effectively
todecarbonize buildings increase to meet climate change goals, educational programs to supportsuch energy workforce development efforts are becoming more prominent at many levels,including in the K-12 school systems, and in higher education. A recent report [1] funded by theU.S. Department of Energy (DOE) provides state-level workforce projections for the energyefficiency sector for 2025 and 2030. Within higher education, one long standing program thathas focused on this since the 1970s is the Industrial Assessment Center (IAC) program including37 university-based IACs operating across the U.S., typically with 10-30 active students percenter at any given time [2]. The IACs have two main goals. First is conducting building energyaudits of small and
. Our expectedoutcome is a stronger sense of community among the students and faculty in the department.IntroductionLearning is a socially situated process optimized when students construct their knowledgetogether [1], [2], [3]. As communities of practice, college learning communities facilitate thedevelopment of collaborative and academic support relationships through ongoing peerinteraction [1]. College students’ sense of community has been directly linked to theirpersistence [4], satisfaction with the university, motivation, and perception of course value [5].Literature also shows that first-year college students with positive changes in universitybelonging have corresponding positive changes in self-perceptions (e.g., academic competence
neurodevelopmental disorders, as well as dyslexia, dysgraphia, and dyscalculia, whichhave been categorized as specific learning disabilities (SLDs) [1, 2]. Historically, research hasfocused on the deficits related to these neurological variations. However, recent research hasreflected a growing interest in understanding the strengths associated with neurodiversity. Agrowing body of literature suggests that neurodivergent individuals may possess traits such asdivergent thinking, risk-taking, creativity, or spatial visualization skills [3-7] that may be assetsin STEM fields. Despite the potential of neurodivergent students to leverage these strengths tocontribute to innovation in their fields, they face a multitude of barriers and difficulties whilenavigating
which an operational measure reflects the concept being investigated (Netemeyer etal., 2003). Articles using standard quantitative research methods were further coded into 12 broadcategories and 73 subcategories. The list of categories, including types of quantitative research,quantitative study design, data source, data type, and quantitative methods used, are summarizedin Table 1. These standard quantitative research articles were further coded for study design, datasource, data type, and quantitative methods used to analyze the data. Study designs includerandomized control trials (RCT), quasi-experimental, assessment validation, and correlational.RCT is defined as an experiment under controlled conditions to demonstrate a known truth
generating, representing,transforming, and recalling well-structured symbolic or visual images [1] - [2]. Activities such asnavigation, mental rotation, and perception of objects require the use of spatial thinking toaccomplish, as well as topics and procedures in many Science, Technology, Engineering, andMathematics (STEM) fields [3] - [4]. There is uniform agreement on the multidimensionality ofspatial ability; however, the exact number of constructs has not been formally agreed upon [5]. Afew of the more prevalent constructs of spatial ability include mental rotation, spatial orientation,and spatial perception [1], [6]. This paper refers to spatial ability as the quantification ofperformance on a specific construct of spatial thinking.Past
and lower spatialawareness as a result of the effects from the COVID-19 pandemic.Introduction The ability to represent, manipulate, and transform mental imagery has often beendefined as spatial ability [1]. Research has shown that students with higher spatial ability tend toperform better in both STEM educational settings and STEM occupations [2]. Furthermore, weknow from previous research that spatial ability is something that can be improved upon overtime through the implementation of interventions and/or training [3]. These findings highlightthe importance of assessing spatial ability for future performance predictions, and also for theimplementation of effective interventions and/or training for increasing spatial ability
assessment optionally a second time for some form of grade replacement. The twoassessments are typically referred to as the first-chance exam and the second-chance exam (orretake exam). The first- and second-chance exams generally have the same structure, content anddifficulty, although questions are not typically identical for both assessments [1, 2].Prior work (discussed below) has shown that second-chance testing benefits learning, but there isa lack of clarity regarding the best grading policies for second-chance testing. For manyinstructors new to second-chance testing, a “full replacement” policy that takes the maximum ofthe student’s first- and second-chance exam scores seems good, because, after all, if a studentmasters the material to
used toexamine the sensitivity of a typology to differences between course types and over time.Application of the Course Change Typology was useful in uncovering details about the typologydimensions of Significant Learning – Technical and Significant Learning – Professional utilizedwithin different types of courses and changes over time.IntroductionA top priority for organizations dedicated to engineering research and practice has beenrevolutionizing engineering classrooms to better prepare the next generation of engineers [1], [2],[3]. Instructors are adopting research-based approaches to teaching that are changing classroomsbut these changes are often difficult to detect and track in ways that are useful for research anddepartmental action
Mathematics EducationAbstractThis paper shares the initial findings of a three-year research project. Quantitative methods wereused to develop coarse-grained understandings of undergraduate students’ self-regulation ofcognition (SRC) and self-regulation of motivation (SRM) during academic problem-solvingactivities in two undergraduate engineering and mathematics (EM) courses. Two researchquestions were constructed to guide this study: (1) How are SRC and SRM strategies related toeach other while solving EM problems?; and (2) How do students perceive their SRC and SRMstrategies for problem-solving activities in EM courses?Two 2nd year EM courses, Engineering Statics and Ordinary Differential Equations, werepurposefully selected as the contexts of the
his team received for the best paper published in the Journal of Engineering Education in 2008, 2011, and 2019 and from the IEEE Transactions on Education in 2011 and 2015. Dr. Ohland is an ABET Pro- gram Evaluator for ASEE. He was the 2002–2006 President of Tau Beta Pi and is a Fellow of the ASEE, IEEE, and AAAS. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2023 Introduction Engineering classrooms have adopted team-based learning as a popular and effectivepedagogy for a long time [1-3]. Given the booming of computer-assisted learning technologies,instructors could easily observe the different ways of interaction and collaboration across teamsand among team
research aims to amplify the voices and work of students, educators, and Minority-Serving Institutions (MSIs) overall and support continued educational innovation within engineering at these institutions. Specifi- cally, she focuses on (1) educational and professional development of graduate students and faculty, (2) critical transitions in education and career pathways, and (3) design as central to educational and global change. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2023 WIP: Who are Graduate Program Directors and What are their Roles in Healing within Graduate Engineering EducationAbstract This Work in Progress (WIP) paper proposes a synthesis of
discussion of thefive fundamental principles that embody QuantCrit: (1) the centrality of racism (this principleasserts that racism is a ubiquitous component of society, and some scholars do not believe it isquantifiable); (2) numbers are not neutral (e.g., using statistics to show deficits in minoritizedgroups); (3) Categories/groups are not natural nor given (i.e., race and gender as socialconstructs); (4) Data cannot speak for themselves (all data require interpretation); (5) Socialjustice and orientation (QuantCrit denies assumed objectivity and political neutrality whenapplying quantitative research).Person-Centered and Variable Centered ApproachesTo help distinguish between the underlying mechanisms of various quantitative approaches,Godwin
Learning: Survey Development and Validation (Work-In-Progress)INTRODUCTIONBackgroundWater crises in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region are a colossal problem that haslong existed. In the MENA region, war will likely erupt due to a water shortage [1], [2]. Whilethe current crises in the region are because of oil, it is predicted that future wars will beinevitable if the water crisis is not solved [2], [3]. This is because three-quarter of the land massis arid, and most water sources originate outside the region [3]. Among other things, water crisesin the region have resulted from the mismanagement of available water, lack of optimization ofwater irrigation systems, increasing water demand, decreasing groundwater table
students’reactions to traditional and innovative learning experiences. We attempt to center students’ experiences as theirtruth while focusing on two research questions:(1) What are engineering students' stated and unstated expectations of their educators?(2) What types of examples about faculty do engineering students use to differentiate good and bad educators?Study designStudy context and participantsParticipants are enrolled in the college of engineering at a large, public, research university in the US South. Theuniversity is classified as highly research productive, highly selective, and doctoral granting. Average SAT scoresare above 1400 with an ~20% acceptance rate. We include those statistics as we expect prior experiences ineducation, especially
on Professional Identity Development of InternationallyTrained Minoritized Women Early Career Researchers (ECR) in Canada: A Work in ProgressAbstractThe experiences of internationally trained minoritized academic researchers in engineering andeducation tend to deviate from the dominant developmental model of the doctoral program andfaculty preparation. Our research extended the use of duoethnography methods to trio-ethnographyand adapted Carlson and team’s conceptual model of professional identity development [1] toinvestigate how internationally trained minoritized women early career researchers (ECR) buildtheir professional identity construction throughout their doctoral study. Our preliminary findingshighlighted
around 14 years of teaching experience in undergraduate engineering and technology education. His research interest is to explore, understand, and enhance ways to promote self-directed, self-regulated life-long learning among the undergraduate engineering student population. Various pieces of his research efforts are intended to converge into an inclusive instructional design for undergraduate engineering students. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2023 1 Institutional Role in the Mental Health and Wellbeing of Undergraduate Engineering Students: Student
the higher education analytics puzzle, however,is the ability to easily perform progress-based analyses over cohorts of students, e.g., all of the stu-dent currently enrolled in the college of engineering. This type of analysis involves three necessarycomponents, (1) individual student performance data, e.g., courses taken and grades earned; (2)the degree requirements associated with all of the degrees students in a given cohort are pursuing;and, (3) a reasoning algorithm that can reconcile (1) and (2), i.e., the ability to determine howthe coursework on student transcripts applies towards the satisfaction of the requirements in thedegree programs they are pursuing. Using these three components it is possible to create summarystatistics and