can change the ways we collaborate, learn, read, and write. Teaching engineering communication allows her to apply this work as she coaches students through collaboration, design thinking, and design communication. She is part of a team of faculty innovators who originated Tandem (tandem.ai.umich.edu), a tool designed to help facilitate equitable and inclusive teamwork environments.Mark Mills, University of Michigan Mark Mills (he/him) is a Data Scientist on the Research & Analytics team at University of Michigan’s Center for Academic Innovation. He directs and supports analytics across CAI’s portfolio of educational technologies. His experience is in prediction and classification of longitudinal and hierarchically
are in theirlearning process [13]; classroom interactions, both with instructors and peers, significantly shapestudents’ sense of belonging and academic achievement [14]; and lastly, understanding instructors’expectations, which is students’ understanding of course demands and shape their responses toinstructional strategies.MethodsParticipants and Data CollectionAfter receiving approval from the University Institutional Review Board (IRB), we recruitedengineering college students with ADHD at a research-intensive institution located in theMidwestern United States. We emailed a random sample of 1,800 of the 11,104 currently enrolledengineering students, inviting them to attend a focus group or interview if they had previouslyreceived a formal
], and proposes an alternative way to think about the role of self-efficacy in careerchoice development. The motivation of this paper was a quantitative study that produced resultsmisaligned with SCCT and a follow-up qualitative study of the same population that usedPVEST to explore underlying reasons. While empirical studies generally support the SCCTmodel (i.e., mathematics self-efficacy is correlated positively with mathematics performance[2]), research with minoritized youth is much less consistent [3], [4], [5], [6]. For example, Blackstudents had higher mathematics self-efficacy compared to White, Hispanic, or Asian peers, butthat did not translate to performance [7], [8]. Using PISA 2003 data, researchers even found asignificant negative
Iron Range Engineering on the Mesabi Range College Campus. Dr. Christensen received her Ph.D. in Engineering Education from Utah State University in the Summer of 2021. The title of her Dissertation is ”A Mixed-Method Approach to Explore Student Needs for Peer Mentoring in a College of Engineering.” Darcie holds a Master of Engineering degree in Environmental Engineering (2019) and Bachelor of Science degree in Biological Engineering (2017), both from Utah State University. She is passionate about student success and support, both inside and outside of the classroom.Dr. Elizabeth Pluskwik, Minnesota State University, Mankato Elizabeth leads the Engineering Management and Statistics competencies at Iron Range
students in STEM (Ong et al., 2018; McGee, 2018), understanding how Black PhDstudents navigate their engineering studies could be particularly insightful in boosting the enrollment rateand retention. However, all the information related to engineering experiences are only disseminatedtraditionally in the form of peer-reviewed scholarly manuscripts, which has limited impact to those whochoose to read such literature. Given the current socio-political climate in the aftermath of two pandemics(i.e., racism-20 and COVID -19), greater awareness of the ways students from traditionally marginalizedgroups in higher education interact and make sense of their environments is of paramountimportance. Black students have shared stories of microaggressions
their identities in cis-heteronormative and masculine society andengineering spaces [12], nonbinary students in higher education experience frequent gender-based discrimination [11], microaggressions [13], and even fear of victimization in hostileenvironments [14]. Frequent exposure to hostile environments can result in nonbinary studentsexperiencing heightened levels of minority stress [15], [16], isolation [17], depression andanxiety [18]. Unsurprisingly, trans* and gender nonconforming students have 10% lower rates ofretention than cisgender and heterosexual peers, while LGBQ students have 7% lower rates ofretention than cisgender and heterosexual peers [19].It is well established that support networks created for cisgender students promote
afriendly and encouraging environment for female undergraduate students. Some of the reasons are:(1) Female students are not invited to join a team of male students.(2) Female students feel shy or discouraged from joining a team.(3) Female students are assigned note-taking or report-writing tasks, while male students work inteams on computing and project development.(4) The team members may not consider Female students' ideas or suggestions.(5) Teams schedule their meetings on days/times at a location that female students do not prefer.(6) Course instructors do not observe the team dynamics, so they are unaware of female students'struggles and challenges in teams and fitting into the profession.(7) The course instructor/male students are biased
improvegender-based performance. However, this could also be due to the sampling bias.The analysis from the second class showed similar trends; hence, we do not elaborate on theresults from the second class here.Summary: We draw two conclusions from our evaluation. First, we observe that anonymousgrading can lead to better grades for certain ethnicities (Ethnicity 2). Secondly, we observe thatanonymous grading does not lead to better grades when considering gender. Figure 7: Grade differences between two genders considered for the two groups.Potential PitfallsWe have found three main limitations of our study. 1) Writing style: The assessments we are considering are handwritten in-person submissions. Some identifiers, like handwriting or
, interviews, self-reflection, and peer assessment [22] are common and valuable approaches to assessingindividuals' teamwork performance. Critical Team Behaviors Form (CTBF) measures teamworkskills in tactical decision-making teams, in which the critical skill dimensions and behaviorsmust be identified and presented in reports. Multiple raters strive for consistency in theirjudgments on assessment reports (David Kraus). Furthermore, the format for the measurementmethodology must be readily understandable and usable [20]. Teamwork assessment tools usedin engineering education have also been studied in the existing literature, for example, self-reflections [23], peer assessment [24], e-portfolio [25], online assessment tools [26].3.2 Methodological
and Use Committee (IACUC), and grant writing and proposalpreparation. Additionally, a session on technology transfer is provided.A mid-term report is due after 4 weeks, and at the end of the program a presentation poster is tobe presented to the public, faculty, and fellow students, with a demonstration of the projectdesigned.The program has been successfully conducted in the summers of 2022 and 2023, with intentionsto proceed into summer 2024. The current year's participation data is encouraging, featuring 31undergraduate students, which constitutes 10% of the school's undergraduate body. Thedistribution across academic years includes 3 seniors, 8 juniors, 14 sophomores, and 6 freshmen.Fairfield University's summer research initiative
Education. Her research interests center on the concept of sense of belonging, peer and faculty interactions, and graduate education. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2025 A Scoping Review on Non-Majority Students’ Sense of Belonging in Engineering and Computing Education: Uncovering the Barriers, Supports, and Contexts AbstractThis work-in-progress theory paper discusses the preliminary findings of a scoping literaturereview on non-majority students’ sense of belonging in engineering and computing education,focused on barriers, supports, and contexts. A substantial body of research underscores thesignificant impact of sense of belonging on
us to conduct research “with” and not “on”another, situating the Other as equals not to change the other but to change self [18].MethodsAnuli and Glory discovered that they had similar interests at an online conference and thereafterthe idea of writing a duoethnography emerged, they then invited Kelly to join the team, and webecame a trio-ethnography. Our research process started in July 2022 when we participated in a 5-week workshop where we worked with mentors to refine our research plan. Thereafter, we metevery Monday for an hour over 6 months to execute our study. Collaboration tools utilized wereZoom, Google Drive, WhatsApp, and emails. After our interview questions were drafted to guideour dialogue, we emailed them to a faculty member
to provide diverse perspectives on pressing topicswithin academic and non-academic communities. Individuals participating in panels are usuallybrought together to express a wide range of viewpoints and to combine ideas, research, andexperiences. We see an opportunity to extend panel discussions to have enduring impact bybroadly distributing the data synthesized during the panel discussions. The use of paneldiscussions as a research endeavor has the potential to broaden researchers' ways of knowing, yetknowledge transfer from panel conversations to peer-reviewed publications has to this point beenminimal.This paper highlights a methodology for analyzing panel discussions, discourse content, andpanelist reflection to produce research results
what we consider to be higher-level research tasks. (Ten of 12 studentsresponded to the pre survey, while nine responded to the post survey. Seven responded to both.)Initially, students reported they were “somewhat” or “very” comfortable in their ability to dogeneral tasks such as “working independently,” “problem solving in general,” and “managing mytime.” This is contrasted with their lower initial comfort levels in doing more specific—perhapshigher-level—research skills , such as “defending an argument when asked questions,”“identifying limitations of research methods and designs,” “understanding journal articles,” and“writing scientific reports and papers.” Following the REU program, however, the resultsshowed a change. On average, they
– Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution Joint Program.Catherine G. P. Berdanier, Pennsylvania State University Catherine G.P. Berdanier is an Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering at Pennsylvania State University. She earned her B.S. in Chemistry from The University of South Dakota, her M.S. in Aeronautical and Astronautical Engineering and her PhD in Engineering Education from Purdue University. Her research expertise lies in characterizing graduate-level attrition, persistence, and career trajectories; engineering writing and communication; and methodological development. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 Exploring Engineering Graduate Students’ Perceptions of
and their peers, as well as student to faculty and faculty to faculty. Here, agency is not only decided as how students respond and act on different opportunities or lack thereof, but also understood as a capability shaped by the interaction between students and faculty, and among faculty members. The role of an instructor that seeks to center student agency, can be considered more of a coach, a moderator, or facilitator of learning experiences. Within the context of engineering education, relational agency is extended to how people work together in complex interdisciplinary environments[12], acknowledging that it is required to solve problems when there are different skill sets, expertise, and
writing and communication; and methodological development.Dr. Julio Urbina, Pennsylvania State University JULIO V. URBINA, Ph.D. is a Professor in the School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science at The Pennsylvania State University. Dr. Julio Urbina received his BSEE degree from Universidad Nacional de Ingenieria, Lima, Peru, in 1990, and his M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in electrical engineering from the University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign in 1996 and 2002, respectively. He has worked at Jicamarca Radio Observatory, Arecibo Observatory, and University of Arkansas. Dr. Urbina’s research has used radio and radar technologies to study the Earth’s middle and upper atmosphere. He conducts research in RF and
, “A strategic blueprint for the alignment of doctoral competencies with disciplinary expectations,” vol. 32, pp. 1759– 1773, Jan. 2016.[42] C. G. P. Berdanier, “Linking current and prospective engineering graduate students’ writing attitudes with rhetorical writing patterns,” J. Eng. Educ., vol. 110, no. 1, pp. 207–229, 2021, doi: 10.1002/jee.20368.[43] C. Hixson, W. Lee, D. Hunter, M. Paretti, H. Matusovich, and R. McCord, “Understanding the structural and attitudinal elements that sustain a graduate student writing group in an engineering department,” WLN J. Writ. Cent. Scholarsh., vol. 40, no. 5–6, pp. 18–26, Jan. 2016.[44] M. S. Artiles, N. Huggins, H. M. Matusovich, and S. G. Adams, “Advisors, peers, and
writing, hands-on work, programming, and more. This allowed eachof us to take on roles aligned with our capabilities and learn from each other's expertise. Ibenefited greatly from collaborating with peers who could fill my gaps and enhance mystrengths”. Another student captured the essence of interdisciplinary learning: "I really enjoyhaving research in a team... I can also see more different research fields closely becausedifferent students may have a different research focus." These comments illustrate the richnessof learning and innovation that arises from a mixture of diverse viewpoints and experiences.Positive mentorship dynamics: The role of mentors in shaping the team experience was aunique aspect. Reflecting on the impact of mentorship, a
relationships withpotential recommenders than their peers [3]. Even for students who do develop suchrelationships, there is no guarantee that their accomplishments will be viewed equally. Socialpsychologists warn implicit bias is ubiquitous, even among individuals who aim to treat otherswithout prejudice, and especially in circumstances that involve high-stakes decisions [4].Previous research on LORs, conducted primarily on small samples from medical residency andfaculty searches, suggests that the language used in LORs for qualified applicants from groupsunderrepresented in STEM can differ from groups than aren’t underrepresented in STEM. Forexample, using dictionaries of words and phrases with positive and negative associations, somefind that letters
IKC Value rubric was used to code thestudent reflections. The results of the study demonstrated that living in the learning communityand studying the concepts of intercultural competence while interacting with students of diversebackgrounds allowed the students to develop interculturally. Also, engaging students in guidedreflection helped them to reflect on the intercultural skills that they developed through constantinteraction with peers that requires efficient communication among the team members. Similarly,in another study by Swartz et al. [13], students were challenged to collaborate internationally withstudents from three different countries during a 6-week project to increase their interculturalcompetency. The results of the study
compared to that of the topic-quiz reflection. These results might beexplained by the fact that students were requested to write a 1-page reflection for both the topicquiz and DYOP. It is reasonable that for some levels to increase, others must decrease. Sinceproblems designed by students on the DYOP were of similar complexity as those they completedon quizzes, a decrease in percent coverage at the Understand and Apply levels indicates lessemphasis placed on engagement at these levels during reflection rather than less engagement atthem. Indeed, it would be difficult for students to engage at the Analyze level without first havingengaged fully in the Understand and Apply levels. The decrease in N/A (-20.6%), however, can beattributed to a decrease
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
based on their engineering experiences willhighlight possible misalignments between inclusive policies for women and their realities ofbeing part of a minority population in engineering. However, accessing stories of epistemicinjustice can be difficult due to the complexity of the theory; as such, intentional processes forgenerating data collection tools must be developed and documented.This paper details the piloting phase of an interview protocol for narrative analysis for a largerresearch study. We elaborate on the stages of instrument development, including methodjustification, building a preliminary interview protocol, peer review, piloting, and refinement.First, we justify methods by explaining the alignment between narrative analysis and
-level attrition, persistence, and career trajectories; engineering writing and communication; and methodological development. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024A longitudinal investigation of international graduate students’ first-year experiences inU.S. engineering programsKeywords: Attrition, longitudinal study, SMS, time series data, International doctoral students,EngineeringAbstractThe purpose of this full research paper is to explore international engineering graduate students’experiences in U.S. graduate programs through one year of short message service (SMS) (i.e., textmessage) survey data. Although international graduate students constitute a high proportion ofengineering students in
identify meaningful and recurrent aspects of disabled students’ experiences inengineering from the transcribed interviews. The second round of coding used pattern coding toorganize aspects of these experiences into sub-themes. Presented in this paper are aspects relatedto intersectionality within two of the co-researchers’ disabled identities. The research team employed multiple measures throughout the research process to buildtrustworthiness and quality (Tracy, 2010; Saldaña, 2016). During all stages of the researchprocess, we carefully reflected on our positionalities and how they could influence and/or biasthe work. We met multiple times throughout the data analysis and writing process to providediverse perspectives, interrogate our
, directories, books and monographs. • Engineering database - Compendex & Inspec (Engineering Village): 1884 - Current; Indexes 2,600+ international scholarly and trade journals and conference proceedings in all aspects of engineering. Compendex is Elsevier’s flagship engineering-focused database that provides comprehensive and trustworthy content to improve research outcomes and maximize the impact of your engineering research. • Engineering Education database - Papers on Engineering Education Repository (PEER): This is the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) conference proceedings database. For the first two databases, to ensure populated results were adequate in achieving
potential bias that may impact their teaming and interactions with peers in anengineering design setting, educators can share evidence from psychological sciences about whatstereotype threat is, how stereotype threat may affect students in science and engineeringcontexts, and how to lessen the impact of stereotype threat on students’ performance. Evidencesuggests that discussions of stereotype threat before a key assessment (e.g., exam or designreview) can improve student performance on that assessment [9], [10]. Such critical primingprior to or during team-based design projects allows students to raise their awareness andpotentially implement some behavioral changes towards others (e.g., not defining others by theirgender or race or associated
students with motorimpairments may have difficulty using a keyboard or mouse to write code [10]. As a result, allthese students may require specific tools and resources tailored to the nuances of the field [10].Homing in on higher education computing curriculum, this research aligns with the growingemphasis on inclusive practices in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics)fields [12]. Historically, STEM disciplines have grappled with, and are still grappling with,issues of diversity and inclusivity [12]. This literature review explores how accessibility isintegrated with STEM curricula, thereby contributing to the broader conversation on fosteringdiversity in education.Study OverviewGiven the continuously evolving landscape of
engineering students are often notconsidered [4, 13].As described by Polkinghorne [20], narrative research commonly includes two forms of analysis:narrative analysis, in which structured narratives are built from existing data, and analysis ofnarratives, in which data already exists in narrative form. This outcome of the analysis ofnarratives technique often consists of a set of themes that the researcher can use to makeinferences about the sample they studied. Meanwhile, the outcome of the narrative analysistechnique is a story, ordered chronologically, that synthesizes various data into a cohesiveelement. This form of narrative analysis can be thought of as writing an account of someone'slife, such as a biography. The researcher may interview the