and directions ahead in theprofessional development programme.Challenges in faculty upskilling:Upskilling faculty members in pedagogy and technology tools could be complex andchallenging. Techno-pedagogical training provides faculty members with the skills requiredto design and deliver effective instructional materials and activities with the means adoptedby the students. At present, the focus of upskilling is in four major clusters (a) contentknowledge; (b) pedagogical knowledge; (c) pedagogical cum technical content knowledge;and (d) technology cum pedagogical knowledge, as shown in figure 1. Content knowledge Techno
highlighting the importance of identifying optimized academictechniques and adequate integrity training to improve students’ experience and performance.These results highlight the need to investigate and understand factors potentially contributing tostudents’ elevated Turnitin similarity scores to achieve the goal of helping students from allbackgrounds to succeed in their graduate studies. Preferred presentation format: “Lightning talk”IntroductionAdvances in technology can facilitate how education increases students’ knowledge and skills[1],but can also offer a means to practice dishonest behaviors[2]. Plagiarism, the use of other’s workor ideas without proper reference to the author, hinders education and raises an important ethicalissue[3
virtual meetings and workshops, includinga virtual Kickoff Workshop, a hybrid Writers Retreat, and 1:1 coaching with the ProjectCoordinator and other writing mentors. By the end of the AWP, 27 authors had drafted 71activities in 17 areas of CS. Fifty-eight activities were revised and approved by the programas ready for classroom testing. Almost all of the authors planned to use the developed activitiesin their classes (88%) and share them with others (78%), while 75% planned to develop moreactivities. Almost all (88%) felt that the writing process impacted how they teach with POGILactivities. Thus, the AWP is an effective model to support faculty and produce quality activities.1. IntroductionCollaborative learning activities benefit student
manufacturing landscape.As the demand for automation in assembly lines and manufacturing processes continues to rise,we recognize the importance of providing our students with relevant certifications [1, 2]. Our goalis to train and certify our faculty in the latest technologies, enabling them to guide students indeveloping integrated smart manufacturing systems that utilize industrial robots and PLCs fortasks like material handling, painting, assembly, and CNC machining. According to studies byDeloitte and The Manufacturing Institute, the skills gap in manufacturing may leave an estimated2.4 million positions unfilled over the next decade [3]. As the US manufacturing industry embracesIndustry 4.0 [4] and digital transformation, there is a growing
the evidence in the portfolio and triangulate with student ratings andtheir own observations of the faculty member’s teaching.Both the portfolio and peer review are guided by three pillars of effective teaching: StudentLearning, the Learning Environment, and Processes of Improvement. In the teaching portfolio,the faculty member documents 1) evidence of student achievement of learning outcomes, 2) howthe learning environment is used to motivate learning, and 3) the faculty member’s efforts tocontinuously improve as a teacher. The portfolio, essentially a teaching journal, is regularlyupdated and constitutes a real-time, growing record of the teaching stewardship.Then at each step of the tenure process, a snapshot of the portfolio is taken and
individual, empowerment”(Ladson-Billings, 1995, p. 160). Critical consciousness is the third tenet of Ladson-Billings’s(1995) CRP extends “a student’s efficacy in identifying STEM norms and practices that formvisible and invisible exclusionary barriers in STEM programs and STEM fields” (Castaneda,2019, p. 1). Unlike Freire’s initial focus on developing the critical consciousness of men,Ladson-Billings (1995) focused on students, specifically their challenging the status quo. Theseworks have facilitated the development of more contemporary frameworks for measuring andengaging in critical consciousness, especially in K-12 student development and research.Three Elements of Critical Consciousness Other contemporary formulations of critical
: reflection, metacognitionIntroductionReflection is highly beneficial for both students and instructors in the engineering classroom [1].For students, reflection promotes self-directed learning and enhances their self-awareness of theirstrengths, weaknesses, and overall progress in achieving the learning objectives. Research hasshown that students who were trained to reflect on their work outperformed those who did nothave a similar opportunity [2]. For instructors, reflection allows for valuable insight intostudents’ learning processes, the identification of students’ needs, and the opportunity to makenecessary adjustments to their teaching methods for improved student outcomes.Based on Boud et al.[3], we define reflection as follows: "reflection is
casestudy, as explained next. Our sessions were attended voluntarily by about 10 experienced (mostwith 5+ years of teaching) tenure-line and instructional faculty, all of whom were members ofour usual audience of faculty who are interested in evidence-based teaching.First session on faculty ethics: an exploration of ethical guidelines in higher educationIn the first session we discussed briefly what it means to be a member of a profession, rather thanbeing a practitioner of a craft or just having a job. A profession is a group that is “organized toearn a living by openly serving a certain moral ideal in a morally permissible way beyond whatlaw, market, and morality would otherwise require.”[1] Some of the elements of a profession arethat it
foregone conclusion, faculty have responded with varying degrees of enthusiasm,resignation, and denial. And as with most issues of pedagogy, there is lively disagreement amonginstructors about whether and how to use LLMs with their students [1][2], with some prohibitingLLM use and others swiftly integrating them into their course assignments [3][4][5].Lagging behind an enthusiastic integration of LLM-based course tools by some in highereducation is a serious discussion of ethical concerns and questions about LLMs themselves; thisfailure may stem in part from a reluctance to voice concerns in the face of institutionalenthusiasm and pressure to “fully embrace” LLMs or risk being labeled a “dinosaur” [1][6].Regardless of cause, this lack of discourse
, there is both an opportunity and a need to utilize this interest for innovative and engaging faculty development purposes [1]. For learning games to reach their full potential, the data produced by these games should be analyzed to make improvements to the game and assess users’ learning. Since each game produces unique types of data and requires different interpretive approaches, a universal method for analysis does not exist. This underscores the need to create a customized data analysis system for analyzing gaming data that can be used for this project and other games in the future. This paper presents an overview of the game’s design, its data collection process, the development of a customized analysis workflow, and the broader
game-based learning activities, and how these practices affected student motivation.Deborah Moyaki, University of Georgia ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2025 WIP: An early glimpse into the ‘who’, ‘what’, and ‘why’ of faculty interactions about engineering teaching and learningIntroductionFaculty interactions are common in academic workplaces, where faculty members interact,communicate, and form relationships and connections. Relationships are important and vital inevery sphere of social life, including academia. Relationships play an important role in developingindividual and systemic capacity for change [1-3], which refers to the ability and empowerment ofsystem
activeengagement with real-world applications. The latter methods align with Mezirow’s transformativelearning theory [1], which emphasizes the importance of critical reflection and meaning-makingin adult learning rather than passive information absorption. Faculty development programs,admittedly, are not uniform; and there is a need to account for a local culture, circumstances, andlimitations. Some programs incorporate scaffolding through periodic meetings and individualizedinterventions, fostering a more sustained and supportive learning process. In the spirit ofcontinuous improvement, this article reflects on and aims to enhance the methodologies employedin faculty development. We embrace the perspective that every faculty member is a lifelonglearner
collaborative, in-classlearning activities. This paper provides more detail on these strategies and the proposed means ofassessment. Instructors may consider incorporating these types of changes into their courses tosupport their students’ sense of belonging and engagement in their courses.1. IntroductionHistorically underrepresented minority students and low-income students are proportionally lesslikely to graduate with STEM degrees as compared to typically overrepresented students [1] –[3]. These groups of students will be collectively referred to as “from minoritized groups inSTEM, or MGS [students]” [4]. A possible key contributor to this gap in graduation ratesbetween MGS and majority students is belonging uncertainty [5] – [8], feelings that
through four key stages: (1) Discover, identifyingstrengths and high-point experiences; (2) Dream, envisioning aspirational goals based on those strengths;(3) Design, creating actionable strategies; and (4) Destiny, implementing and sustaining the vision(Cooperrider & Srivastva, 1987). In faculty mentoring, Appreciative Inquiry has been applied to createsupportive and collaborative environments that enhance professional development. For instance, Matheret al. (2024) introduced the Appreciative Mentoring Model, which integrates Appreciative Inquiryprinciples to support early-career faculty members. Similarly, Oxendine, Robinson, and Parker (2022)utilized Appreciative Inquiry to transform departmental culture through appreciative peer
Engineering Education, 2025 WIP: A Call to Action: Developing A Leadership Program that Supports Academic Caregivers Using the Kotter Change ModelIntroductionHigher education has adopted a capitalistic model prioritizing productivity and efficiency, oftenbased on the "ideal worker" with no outside obligations. As a result, academics with caregivingresponsibilities face added pressure [1]. While caregiving traditionally includes childcare andeldercare, the National Academy of Science, Engineering, and Mathematics (NASEM) defines itmore broadly as caring for spouses, dependent children with medical conditions, and extendedfamily members [2]. Since the COVID-19 pandemic, academics, particularly women in STEM,have shouldered a
each other’sclasses, discussed what we saw, and shared feedback with each other. Our peer observation ef-forts are ongoing in Spring 2025, with a focus on offering the peer observation to junior facultywithin engineering. The focus on junior faculty is motivated to provide this resource to our newerfaculty who may have the most to gain from peer observation.MethodsMany resources exist for developing peer teaching observation protocols, evaluating institutionalor department-level teaching evaluation processes, and training faculty to objectively and/or con-structively evaluate teaching through classroom visits [10, 3, 1, 20]. Starting in January of 2024,our POET group met roughly every three weeks for an hour, beginning with a review of
orientation in order to build a recordof their development as a researcher, communicator, and transdisciplinary team member. Fellowswill be asked to continuously update their portfolio and to write reflections on their progressincluding successes that they have had and barriers or challenges that they have faced eachquarter. The reflection will be discussed with mentors and fed into their individual developmentplan so that the mentors can understand what is working well and what changes need to be made.Regular Meetings: As part of their professional development, fellows will engage in regularmeetings with several different mentors and collaborators. In recognition that at least weeklyinteraction with advisors contributes to fellow’s success [1], each
All movement [1, 2] has universities throughout the worlddeveloping campus-wide entrepreneurship initiatives in the form of new centers, degrees,minors, courses, accelerator programs, and student organizations. Many engineering faculty arebecoming involved in teaching entrepreneurial thinking due to the connection betweenengineering design and opportunity recognition, often associated with entrepreneurship.However, dissemination and sharing practices have yet to be fully optimized across engineeringfaculty and their institutions [3]. The dissemination of best teaching practices can be done through a variety of formats.Yet, within the academic setting, journal manuscripts, and conference proceedings are the mostwell-documented
for Empathy as a Teaching Practice in Engineering EducationAbstractThis theoretical paper will introduce a conceptual framework for empathy as a teaching practiceto improve engineering students’ educational experiences. As engineering education strives tomeet the industry demands for qualified individuals, it is imperative to address the persistentretention problem in engineering programs, particularly for those individuals from marginalizedgroups [1]. Research suggests that building connections between students and faculty can play acritical role in shaping a positive academic climate [2].One strategy for building rapport between faculty and students is to incorporate empathicconcern as a teaching practice in
graduate education, faculty hiring, and the pathway to an academic career. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2023 Lessons Learned: Faculty Search Committees’ Attitudes Towards and Against Rubrics Gabriella Coloyan Fleming, Maura BorregoIntroduction Faculty search committees are the gatekeepers to the next generation of tenure-trackfaculty [1]. The tenure-track faculty search process typically follows similar steps: 1)development and marketing of the position, 2) narrowing the candidate pool from all applicantsto a “long list” for first-round interview (often, on the phone or a video call), 3) conducting first-round interviews, 4
evaluation in the future.Tags: Postdoctoral Development, Future Faculty Development Program, Program Evaluation,Underrepresented IdentitiesBackground Postdoctoral (postdoc) appointments are meant to be temporary opportunities for thesescholars to develop important skills and enhance their research while still under the guidance ofanother scholar in their field. These appointments often appeal to PhD earners interested inpursuing a tenure-track faculty position, but feel they need additional development in a neededskill or to build on their research portfolio [1]. When considering that postdoc appointmentstructures and expectations can vary wildly depending on discipline, location, and funding, andthe number of postdocs at any given
, Design, and Construction (VDC) tools and techniquesavailable to skilled laborers and employees who can handle and utilize these tools to speed up theprocess of construction projects and improve cost, productivity, and overall marketing strategiesof new construction. Researchers have identified various successful strategies, metrics, andscorecards to evaluate the role of VDC in a project's success and how it changed howconstruction projects and stakeholders communicate [1]–[4].Introducing Building Information Modeling (BIM) education is not new to the constructionmanagement curriculum. Many faculty experts and industry practitioners excel in teaching BIMto students and helping them understand the core concepts of BIM [5]–[7]. However
and program evaluation studies usingthe Entering Mentoring training curriculum. The review seeks to identify the outcome variablesthat have been assessed to indicate the effectiveness of the Entering Mentoring trainingcurriculum and the measurement instruments used to quantify those variables. Additionally, thestudy provides a discussion on selecting the appropriate tool based on research goals andresources. The findings of this study provide timely insights into research trends on theevaluation of the Entering Mentoring training curriculum in STEM fields.Introduction Effective mentorship has been linked to improving students’ research skills andproductivity [1-4], reducing the risk of anxiety and depression [5-7], and maintaining
talk or traditional lecture.IntroductionIncreasing emphasis has been placed on the engineering education community to implementstudent-centered pedagogies which can increase retention and offer the students a more authentic(“real-world”) experience. These pedagogies have proven to be more effective than thetraditional “chalk-and-talk” passive lecture methods, and include challenge-based learning (e.g.,problem-based learning, project-based learning, case-based learning, inquiry-based learning [1])and a multitude of active/collaborative techniques (e.g., think-pair-share, quick think, jigsaw, andgallery walk). All of these learning methods excel in student learning of content as well as avariety of process skills such as critical thinking
increasein student apprehension of course learning outcomes. Adoption rates for these innovativemethods have remained stagnant despite their known effectiveness [1], [2], [3]. Understandingthe contextual barriers and affordances provides a framework for developing detailed instancesof EBIP implementation. Instructors often cite factors such as time, lack of motivation, studentresistance, and insufficient resources as reasons for their hesitation and or abandonment ofalternative teaching methods. However, these barriers are often discussed at a surface level,making it a challenge to ascertain which departmental, institutional, and cultural changes must bemade to form an effective catalyst towards EBIP adoption rates.Due to the inherently complex
to help inform STEM faculty hiring practices atinstitutions of higher education in the U.S., where over the past two decades, diversity statementshave become more popular components of application packages for faculty jobs. The purpose isto explore the ways and extent to which diversity statements are utilized in evaluating facultyapplicants. The research questions are: (1) To what extent do universities equip searchcommittees to evaluate applicants’ diversity statements? (2) What are STEM faculty’sperspectives of diversity statements in job applications?This paper is derived from a larger two-phase sequential mixed methods study examining thefactors current faculty members and administrators consider important when hiring new STEMfaculty
?Adoption of EBIPs in engineering educationEBIPs, sometimes referred to as research-based instructional strategies (RBIS), are approaches toeducational instruction that have empirically and theoretically been demonstrated to promoteconceptual understanding and improve student learning outcomes [1]. In engineering education,EBIPs are commonly used, however, some techniques have historically garnered more interestand attention in the engineering education domain. There is an abundance of researchdemonstrating the utility and effectiveness of EBIPs and their useful applications in engineeringdomains. However, rates of adoption of EBIPs in engineering courses lag behind facultymembers’ awareness of them [2].Several factors can lead to decreased uptake
LiberatedUniversities of Iraq 1. One of the focus areas of this project was the professional development ofeach University’s engineering educators because of its affordances for sustainable economicgrowth. Subsequently, Purdue University, World Learning, and an Iraqi University conducted ajoint needs assessment to identify the specific areas of interest for the engineering facultymembers. A population survey was conducted with all 161 faculty members of the College ofEngineering. The needs assessment identified student-centered learning, blended learning, andculturally relevant pedagogy as the faculty members’ core pedagogical areas of interest. Theseneeds were identified in a conscious attempt to navigate the disruption to normal day-to-dayclassroom practices
team of faculty to address the current state of instructional practices college-wide. TheCoE had undergone a change in leadership with a new Dean in 2019 and an Associate Dean ofAcademic Affairs in 2021. Building on what the faculty and departments had reported in theirABET Self-Studies during their 2020 accreditation visits, the new administration leaders soughtto first understand the existing culture regarding engineering education within this college.Prior InitiativesIn Fall of 2014, prior college leadership sponsored a six-month internal study conducted by asmall team of engineering faculty and administrators. The team performance was guided by thetraining received in the team alchemy[1] system. Using a process of stakeholder discovery
, women of all racial/ethnic backgrounds,and other underrepresented students [1-4]. While women account for over half of all collegedegrees earned in the United States, the National Science Foundation reports that womencomprise one of the lowest rates of engineering degree recipients [5].Within the engineering workforce in the United States, only 14% of engineers are women and13% of engineers are from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups (African American,Hispanic, Native American/Native Alaskan, and Hawaiian/Pacific Islander) [6]. Thesediscrepancies of representation are addressed in this study as underrepresented minorities(URM). The national need to increase representation in the engineering workforce includesretaining URM students that