Paper ID #29450Analysis of Panel Summaries of Proposals Submitted to the S-STEM Pro-gramMs. Samara R. Boyle, Rice UniversityDr. Yvette E. Pearson P.E., Rice University Dr. Yvette E. Pearson holds a B.S. in Civil Engineering and M.S. in Chemistry from Southern University and a Ph.D. in Engineering and Applied Science from the University of New Orleans. She is Associate Dean for Accreditation, Assessment, and Strategic Initiatives in the George R. Brown School of Engi- neering at Rice University, a Program Evaluator for the Engineering Accreditation Commission of ABET, a registered Professional Engineer in Louisiana, a
finding agrees with other surveys. One survey bySimpson Scarborough [3] of 513 students in March 2020 found that, among college students whotook the survey, “63% say online instruction is worse than the in-person instruction they receivedat their school.” A second survey at the Harvard School of Dental Medicine [4] found thatstudents reported that “their learning has worsened since the move to e-learning, with 44% ofstudents responding ‘somewhat worsened’ and 26% answering ‘significantly worsened.”Ithaka S+R, in partnership with 21 universities across the U.S., developed a student surveyfocused on institutional communications and support, curricular needs, safety and well-being,and fall retention [5]. 15,677 students completed the survey. The
throughplatform demos, usage trials, and Q&A sessions with the platform’s sales representatives. Wewill refer to the three used in the final evaluation as Platform 1, Platform 2, and Platform 3. Allthree of these do have the necessary interactivity capabilities to create active learning videos.Platform 1 was specifically created for education and can-do progression bar hotspots, branching(in-video), and multiple quiz formats. However, Platform 1’s use and campus integration isstructured for entire departments/institutions, and is only able to offer a cost estimate for theentire department, rather than on a course-by-course basis. The department proposal was tooexpensive to justify for piloting for one class. After explaining this to Platform 1’s team
courses for Pass/Fail (PS/FL) without the course impactingtheir overall GPA. Credit was received for passing a PS or P course; however, a traditional Fresulted in 0 grade points which lowered the student’s GPA. For graduate students, a passing gradeis considered an A or B, and for undergraduate students an A, B, or C grade. As shown in Table3, no graduate student received an FL grade. Pass (P) and Satisfactory (S) grades are primarilyreserved for thesis and dissertation courses. Graduate students performed slightly better during theCOVID pandemic months.For undergraduate students, the percentage of students who passed each semester was relativelyconsistent; see Table 4. Perhaps due to uncertainty with the fully remote learning environment,many
inquiry, 2nd ed., N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln, Eds. 2003, pp. 249–291.[8] J. W. Creswell, Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2003.[9] D. L. Morgan, “Paradigms lost and pragmatism regained: Methodological implications of combining qualitative and quantitative methods,” J. Mix. Methods Res., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 48–76, 2007.[10] P. Shannon-Baker, “‘But I wanted to appear happy’: How using arts-informed and mixed methods approaches complicate qualitatively driven research on culture shock,” Int. J. Qual. Methods, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 34–52, 2015.[11] C. McCall and C. Edwards, “New Perspectives for Implementing Grounded Theory,” Stud. Eng. Educ., vol
research the integration of innovative instructional strategies and technologies in their classrooms and designs and delivers teaching- focused professional development programs for faculty in the college.Dr. Markeya S. Peteranetz, University of Nebraska-Lincoln Dr. Peteranetz is the Learning Assessment Coordinator for the University of Nebraska-Lincoln College of Engineering. Her research interests include the impact of instructional practices on student learning and motivation, and sources of within-person variation in motivation and self-regulated learning. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2020 Bridging the Gap: Preparing Future Engineering Faculty for
Engineering; I teach microbiology (lecture and lab) to under- graduates and graduate students and do research on microbes in natural and engineered environments.Dr. S. Ismat Shah, University of Delaware Professor S Ismat Shah has a joint appointment in the Departments of Materials Science and Engineering and Physics and Astronomy. He is also the Director of the Energy and Environment Policy Program. In addition to the STEM courses in his the Departments, he teaches policy and ethics courses.Prof. Sheldon Allister Hewlett, University of DelawareProf. Jenni M. Buckley, University of Delaware Dr. Buckley is an Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering at University of Delaware. She received her Bachelor’s of Engineering (2001
for several years. She holds B.S. in Computer Engineering and M.S. in Industrial Engineering. She received her Ph.D. in Industrial and Systems Engineering from Binghamton University (SUNY). Her background and research interests are in quality and productivity improvement using statistical tools, lean methods and use of information technology in operations management. Her work is primarily in manufacturing and healthcare delivery operations.Dr. Ronald S. Harichandran, University of New Haven Ron Harichandran is Dean of the Tagliatela College of Engineering and is the PI of the grant entitled Developing Entrepreneurial Thinking in Engineering Students by Utilizing Integrated Online Modules and Experiential
accepted responses forseveral weeks.Results and DiscussionImpacts of the AIChE Education Division’s VCP program on the delivery of chemicalengineering courses during the COVID-19 pandemic were wide-ranging. After a web-basedinterest form was circulated to attendees and other members of the AIChE community,respondents answered whether they would like to participate in a VCP, to identify course(s) theywere teaching, and to indicate their willingness and ability to lead/moderate a VCP. Within oneweek, 88 faculty members filled out the form, and the communities began to materialize. Thetotal number of interested participants continued to grow through the semester and into thefollowing semester. From March 2020 to December 2020, 191 participants from
collaboration.AcknowledgmentsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No.#1525345. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in thismaterial are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National ScienceFoundation. This work is done in collaboration with the University of Kansas, Indiana University,Queen’s University at Kingston, University of British Columbia, University of California, Davis,University of Colorado Boulder, and the University of Texas at San Antonio.References [1] C. Baillie and G. Fitzgerald, “Motivation and attrition in engineering students,” European Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 145–155, 2000. [2] B. N. Geisinger and D
analytic lens may contribute to understanding about how co-peersand peer-designers might most effectively play roles in changing faculty practice, and ultimately,in creating more inclusive learning environments for diverse students.AcknowledgmentsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No.#1623105. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in thismaterial are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National ScienceFoundation.References[1] M. Meyer and S. Marx, "Engineering dropouts: A qualitative examination of why undergraduates leave engineering," Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 103, no. 4, pp. 525-548, 2014.[2] S. E
. (2018). African American social work faculty: Overcoming existing barriers and achieving research productivity. Research on Social Work Practice, 28(3), 309.2. Beech et al., (2013). Mentoring programs for underrepresented minority faculty in academic medical centers: A systematic review of the literature. Academic Medicine, 88(4), 541.3. Butz, A. R., Spencer, K., Thayer-Hart, N., Cabrare, I. E., & Byars-Winston, A. (2018). Mentors’ motivation to address race/ethnicity in research mentoring relationships. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, doi:10.1037/dhe0000096.4. Byars-Winston, A., Gutierrez, B., Topp, S., & Carnes, M. (2011). Integrating theory and practice to increase scientific workforce diversity: A
efforts, especially if they are untenured.References[1] M. Davis, “Engineering as profession: Some methodological problems in its study,” in Engineering identities, epistemologies, and values, S. H. Christensen, C. Didier, A. Jamison, M. Meganck, C. Mitcham and B. Newberry (Eds)., Springer, 2015, pp. 65–98.[2] J. R. Lohmann and J. E. Froyd, “Chronological and ontological development of engineering education as a field of scientific inquiry,” in Cambridge handbook of engineering education research, A. Johri and B. M. Olds, (Eds). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press, 2010, pp. 283–309.[3] S. M. Lord, E. J. Berger, N. N. Kellam, E. L. Ingram, D. M. Riley, D. T. Rover, N. Salzman, and J. D. Sweeney
activities. Author Laughton is in her first year at the Citadel, but is already thedepartment’s Chemical Hygiene Officer. Her role as Vice President of Campus Affairs in studentgovernment and her service on the EH&S Committee at a larger, research-focused institutionenabled her department to entrust her with the students’ laboratory safety. While she may still belearning the Citadel’s policies, she has sufficient context from her previous leadership roles toadapt quickly and begin to streamline procedures. While not core to Laughton’s career goals, herprevious experiences allow her to complete her role’s responsibilities with minimal time input.The most important reasons that a student participates in a student government organization
material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSF. References[1] M. F. Fox, “Women and men faculty in academic science and engineering: Social- organizational indicators and implications,” American Behavioral Scientist, vol. 53, no. 7, pp. 997–101, 2010.[2] M. Sabharwal and E. A. Corley, "Faculty job satisfaction across gender and discipline," The Social Science Journal vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 539-556, September, 2009.[3] Bureau of Labor Statistics, U. S. Department of Labor, Occupational Outlook Handbook, Postsecondary Teachers, on the Internet at https://www.bls.gov/ooh/education-training-and- library/postsecondary-teachers.htm
homogeneous group. A group is heterogeneouswith respect to a given question if students in the group select mostly different answers to the question. Agroup is homogeneous with respect to a given question if students in the group select mostly the sameanswers to the question. For these questions, the fitness measure is given by: 1 c n Xi, j = ∑ rs,k , n k=1 s=1where n is the number of students in the group, c is the number of choices for the question, and rs,k is 1when student s has selected option k and 0 otherwise. The expression ns=1 rs,k is the logical or operatorover values of rs,k as s
, nearly half (45%) of all high school seniors indicated an intent to study scienceand engineering (S&E), yet in the 2015 survey of full-time undergraduates, just more than onethird (37%) of undergraduate enrollments were in S&E programs, indicating there exists adisconnect between enrollment and graduation rates. In 2015, out of nearly two-millionbachelor’s degrees earned; less than one-hundred thousand were in engineering (5.2%)(NSB Appendix Table 2-21 [2]). “We are graduating fewer engineers now than 20 years ago,both in terms of absolute numbers and as a percentage of all college degrees” [3]. This is alsoreflected in the National Science Board (NSB) cohort study which identified that more than onein six (16.3%) of students who
, “Teacher and Student Attitudes Toward Teacher Feedback,” RELC J., vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 38–52, 2007.[4] E. Ekholm, S. Zumbrunn, and S. Conklin, “The relation of college student self-efficacy toward writing and writing self-regulation aptitude: writing feedback perceptions as a mediating variable,” Teach. High. Educ., vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 197–207, 2015.[5] R. Yoshida, “Teachers’ choice and learners’ preference of corrective feedback types,” Lang. Aware., vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 78–93, 2008.[6] O. H. A. Mahfoodh and A. Pandian, “A Qualitative Case Study of EFL Students’ Affective Reactions to and Perceptions of Their Teachers’ Written Feedback,” English Lang. Teach., vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 14–25, 2011.[7] T. Ryan and M
that faculty are not being effective in how they engage with students abouttheir mental health. Moving forward, faculty should be provided with resources and training sothat they feel prepared (even if not fully confident) to provide student support. They should beencouraged and empowered to advocate for their students through recognizing signs of distressand ensuring that students are getting the help that they need.References[1] H. Xiao et al., "Are we in crisis? National mental health and treatment trends in college counseling centers," Psychological Services, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 407-415, 2017, doi: 10.1037/ser0000130.[2] C. R. Kessler, P. G. Amminger, B. S. Aguilar-Gaxiola, B. J. Alonso, B. S. Lee, and B. T. Üstün, "Age
mentor and benefits they derive from the process. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development. 22(1), 37–48.Bjursell, C., & Sädbom, R. F. (2018). Mentorship programs in the manufacturing industry. European Journal of Training and Development. 42(7/8), 455-469.Brown II, M. C., Davis, G. L., & McClendon, S. A. (1999). Mentoring graduate students of color: Myths, models, and modes. Peabody Journal of Education, 74(2), 105-118.Byars-Winston, A., Womack, V. Y., Butz, A. R., McGee, R., Quinn, S. C., Utzerath, E., ... & Thomas, S. B. (2018). Pilot study of an intervention to increase cultural awareness in research mentoring: Implications for diversifying the scientific workforce. Journal of
Paper ID #29197Designing a Streamlined Workshop for STEM-H Faculty Engaged in theScholarship of Teaching and LearningMs. Jody Zhong, University of Louisville Ms. Zhong is a fourth-year doctoral student in the College of Education and Human Development at the University of Louisville. Ms. Zhong’s interests lie in researching identity, diversity, and professional development/thriving within the academy.Dr. Patricia A Ralston, University of Louisville Dr. Patricia A. S. Ralston is Professor and Chair of the Department of Engineering Fundamentals at the University of Louisville. She received her B.S., MEng, and PhD
grant from the National Science Foundation # 2027471. Anyopinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those ofthe authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.References[1] J. Bourne, D. Harris, and F Mayadas, “Online engineering education: Learning anywhere, anytime,” Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 94, no. 1, pp. 131-146, 2005.[2] C. Hodges, S. Moore, B. Lockee, T. Trust, and A. Bond, “The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning,” Educause Review, vol. 27, 2020, [Online]. Available:https://er.educause.edu/articles/2020/3/the-difference-between- emergency-remote-teaching-and-online-learning.[3] L
three, when talking about the workload related to the change effort, these facultymembers said similar comments to the change ready faculty such as, “It’s teaching, teaching isteaching.”Examples of poor sportsmanship were evident at the start of the project when Dr. Alban did notwant to participate or commit time to the project for fear it would be replaced with somethingelse. Comments like it “take[s] me away from my comfort zone, which is lecturing” and “I needto be convinced that this is a sustainable effort” are examples of this. These issues were resolvedthrough courteous behaviors from Dr. Bora as evident by comments like this: I feel like without this cohort of colleagues who are making changes … and that person giving me
78 Urban Geography Match 2 Mentee Black Male 36 Mechanical Engineering Mentor White Male 69 Mechanical Engineering Match 3 Mentee Black Male 38 Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering Mentor White Male 74 Biomedical, Chemical, and Biomolecular Engineering Match 4 Mentee Black Male 31 Mechanical Engineering Mentor White Male 84 Mechanical Engineering Match 5 Mentee Black Male 35 Mechanical Engineering Mentor S. Asian Male 73 Mechanical Engineering Match 6 Mentee Black Male 54 Manufacturing Engineering Technology Mentor White Male 76 Manufacturing
., “Engineering by the numbers,” American Society for Engineering Education, Washington D.C., 2017.[4] M. F. Fox, “Institutional Transformation and the Advancement of Women Faculty: The Case of Academic Science and Engineering,” in Higher Education, J. C. Smart, Ed. Springer Netherlands, 2008, pp. 73–103.[5] D. Bilimoria, S. Joy, and X. Liang, “Breaking barriers and creating inclusiveness: Lessons of organizational transformation to advance women faculty in academic science and engineering,” Hum. Resour. Manage., vol. 47, no. 3, pp. 423–441, Sep. 2008, doi: 10.1002/hrm.20225.[6] S. R. Bird, “Unsettling Universities’ Incongruous, Gendered Bureaucratic Structures: A Case-study Approach,” Gender, Work & Organization
advisingchallenge (2nd. Ed.) Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.[2] Noddings, N. (2016). Philosophy of education (4th Edition). New York: Routledge.[3] Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.[4] Johnson, W. B. (2002). The intentional mentor: Strategies and guidelines for the practice ofmentoring. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 33(1), 88-96.[5] Kram, K.E. (1985). Mentoring at Work: Developmental Relationships in Organizational Life.Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.[6] Levinson, D. J., Darrow, C. N., Klein, E. B., Levinson, M. H., & McKee, B. (1978). Theseasons of a man’s life. New York: Ballentine.[7] Marquez, E., Garcia Jr., S. (2019) Creating a
faculty member’s sphere of influenceand avoid potential pitfalls has proven useful in discussions of the CAREER program broadly. Italso generalizes the main components of successful CAREER proposals rather than focusing onthe particular research and education aspects of a project.Moving Toward “CAREER Ready”While the previous two sections provide useful advice for positioning one’s CAREER proposal,they do not include sign-posts indicating what an individual should be doing or looking for to beready to write a competitive CAREER proposal and, if successful, thrive while completing thepromised work. Recognizing this gap, we developed and honed the 5 “I”s of CAREER readiness.The Five I’s are: Ideas, Integration, Impact, Identity, and Infrastructure
theirintern(s). For example, they had to actively encourage confused interns to ask questions.Similarly, the mentors learned that the interns were not always willing to admit when they didnot understand new material. I learned that I should encourage students I am working with to ask more questions earlier on and that I should be more active in confirming that my explanations are adequate. I can do this by asking the student to write in words what I have asked them to do or to show me after they do the first step. I learned that even when a student says they understand and gives a one sentence summary it does not necessarily mean that they understand. I have learned to think from the student side and make
refinement and 2) class content ownership andstudent agency. When building autonomy by increasing student involvement in program andcourse refinement, participants suggested approaches such as allowing students to provide “inputon syllab[i]” and “feedback on different phases of project[s].” In the case of giving students classcontent ownership/student agency, participants expressed how students could be given autonomyby allowing them to “choose or create their own assignment,” by providing opportunities forstudents to “teach class one day,” as well as by "motivating” students to practice autonomy and“solve problems their own way."As observed in Alterman’s Circumplex Model, motivating teaching styles can be adopted toincrease students’ intrinsic