experiencing logistical challenges. In what follows, we shareideas from the literature and from our own observations about engagement-related conflict ondesign teams, and then address the use of MR simulations in educational environments.Engagement-Related Conflict on Engineering Design TeamsTeam-based work is a fundamental tenant of design thinking and the work of an engineer; it iscritical that undergraduate engineering programs include team-based design projects throughoutthe curriculum [1]. The literature has reported on the benefits of and best practices for studentsengaged in team-based design projects [2-4]. Also addressed in the literature are challengesrelated to teamwork, especially with respect to conflicts related to interpersonal dynamics
approach [1], which labels sometraits and conditions as deficits, and where individuals who are neurodivergent (ND) areperceived as abnormal and less competent than neurotypical (NT) students. Others use socio-ecological approaches and asset models when exploring differences [2-3]. This research used theframework of neurodiversity. Neurodiversity frames different neurological conditions of thebrain and nervous system as providing affordances and posing challenges, encompassing bothindividual and social aspects [4].Conditions that are traditionally defined as neurodivergent include attention deficit hyperactivitydisorder (ADHD), autism spectrum disorder (ASD), dyslexia, dyscalculia, dysgraphia, andtrauma-related conditions such as traumatic brain
dynamics.The importance of teamwork is undeniable in industries relating to new product development,and engineering professionals almost always collaborate in project teams composed of peoplefrom various, complementary engineering backgrounds [1-3]. As directed by the projectmanagers or leaders, these project teams are responsible for completing various time-sensitivetasks and producing long lists of deliverables. Professionals from different engineering fieldsmust therefore learn how to effectively collaborate on development projects to produce a productof the highest quality, with the highest efficiency, and ideally at the lowest cost. However,teaching engineering students (especially freshmen) team dynamics [4] and effective strategiesfor handling
programIntroductionThroughout the history of the United States, racial and ethnic minorities have faced sociallyconstructed barriers to access, equity, and success. Though higher education policies are nolonger explicitly exclusionary, the campus climates of many colleges and universities are farfrom inclusive. Further, the lack of racial and ethnic diversity at predominantly Whiteinstitutions (PWIs) presents particularly unwelcoming environments for underrepresentedminority (URM) students, including individuals who identify as Black, Hispanic/Latino, andAmerican Indian or Alaska Native [1]. URM students attending PWIs frequently report feelingsof prejudice, discrimination, and exclusion [2], and such experiences negatively impact theiracademic and social success [3
retention and engagement in the university community?This 1-unit introductory course has been developed around three themes: • Entering the Engineering/Computer Science Profession • Engaging in the University Community • Building Skills for SuccessTo develop students’ professional skills and knowledge of career paths available, the first-yearstudents in this course meet with student leaders, engage in breakout group discussions with theChairperson or a faculty member from their intended major, watch and reflect on brief videosabout each of the majors offered in the School of Engineering and Computer Science, andparticipate in classroom activities focused on professional communication and ethics.Active engagement in the university community is
improvestudents’ anxiety, confidence, and engagement in similar programming courses.Keywords: First-Year Program, Introductory Programming, Collaborative Learning, Educationalinterventions, Vertical Non-Permanent Surfaces, Learning AnxietyIntroductionIntroductory programming is an essential aspect of an engineer’s education. Engineers are usuallytasks with solving complex and complicated real-world problems. To successfully solve suchproblems, an in-depth understanding of how to develop and utilize mathematical andcomputational models to solve problems is vital. Studies have shown that explicitly teaching first-year engineering students how to develop models to solve problems has several benefits [1, 2].Even though programming is a crucial aspect of the
students to see themselves as engineerswhen they experience internal and external recognition from being in the Makerspace. Theresults of this analysis will aid in the creation of effective intervention methods universities canimplement during the first year engineering curriculum to increase retention rates.IntroductionUniversities are focused on improving retention rates of engineering students [1]. Existingquantitative research studies statistically correlate retention with high grades in both high schooland college and high ACT or SAT scores [2]. With the increasing emphasis on engineeringidentity being a prominent contributor to the overall success of engineering students [2], it isimportant to understand why certain students drop their
issues. Thereport entitled 'Barriers and Opportunities for 2-year and 4-year STEM Degrees: SystematicChange to Support Students’ Diverse Pathways,' from the National Academies of Sciences,Engineering, and Medicine [1] focuses on furnishing a comprehensive overview of the currentchallenges faced by students aspiring to attain an engineering degree or certificate. As such theyexplore the available opportunities and strategies needed to surmount these barriers associatedwith the culture of engineering education, defined as the shared patterns of norms, behaviors, andvalues within engineering disciplines that significantly impact teaching methods, and the overallclassroom experience.Over the past ten years, there has been a theoretical shift in
students to demonstrate understanding on learning targets. The in-classassessments are completed individually, without notes, but students are not penalized for anyincorrect attempts. Each problem is aligned with a specific learning target, and a given learningtarget will appear on multiple understanding checks in order to provide extra opportunities andincrease retention. For every learning target, once students fully and correctly justify theirsolutions twice, they have mastered that learning target. Final grades are then calculated based on the number of (1) learning targets that theyhave shown that they have mastered, (2) class preps earned, (3) homework assignmentscompleted, and (4) writing assignments completed. As mentioned above
of Engineering. Her academ ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024IntroductionThis research paper is a step towards building a survey instrument to measure engineering self-concept. A prior systematic review [1] identified multiple sub-constructs of engineering self-concept: perceived competence, engineering intrinsic value, belonging, academic self-description, resilience, and engineering identity. This study focuses on identifying surveystatements that accurately assess these sub-constructs. The survey statements identified in thesystematic review of literature were found to have confounding and ambiguouslanguage/messaging as they described the sub-constructs of engineering self-concept. Thelanguage
freshman engineering students into college has emerged as acritical concern within academic circles. The freshman year serves as a foundational periodduring which students acquire essential skills and establish crucial networks with peers, faculty,and resources. However, many freshmen encounter challenges adapting to the rigors of collegelife, which can impact their academic success and overall well-being [1-9]. Recognizing thesignificance of this transition period, our project aims to address the needs of freshmanengineering students as they navigate their academic and career pathways. Engineers possessexpertise in the intricate design of innovative products, a task enriched by a robust background ineffective design, innovation, and
physicsprior to enrolling in project-based engineering courses. This pathway works well for somestudents but excludes many. Rather than serving as a gatekeeper, our integrated human-centeredengineering pathway will serve as a gateway, thus increasing retention and attraction toengineering, among all students but particularly among those currently struggling to find a placein engineering. We will furthermore develop a sense of community and professional identityamong students through a comprehensive approach that includes advising, mentoring,internships, research opportunities, outside speakers, and more.Our work is guided by four main research questions:1. Are we better able to retain students in engineering on a Human-Centered Engineering pathway?2
mostappropriate approaches to educating future engineers. The emerging challenges and demands inengineering fields require future professionals to have a broader skillset including technicalknowledge, professional competencies, leadership identities, and autonomy. However,engineering faculty faced major challenges trying to include alternative, yet essentialprofessional skills in their curricula, while balancing the demands for increasing technicalcontent. At the University of Texas at El Paso, the introduction of the Leadership andEngineering Education department created a strategic education environment to innovate andprepare engineering students to succeed professionally as autonomous and critically thinkingengineers and leaders [1].Introductory
benefits of peer-enhanced learning, moredeveloped evaluative skills, a greater sense of belonging, improved self-efficacy beliefs, andhigher levels of intrinsic academic motivation. The merging of the two evidence-basedassessment approaches promises a scalable assessment modality hybridizing the pedagogicaldimensions of the former two assessment practices. Our study of students’ surveyed perceptionsabout peer oral exams offers perspectives on the qualities and potential role of peer oral exams ineducational practice and suggests directions for future educational research.IntroductionThe rapidly evolving professional ecosystem of the Fourth Industrial Revolution is placing highdemands on STEM education at an unprecedented rate [1], [2]. Principle
)navigate the same sociotechnical design challenge based on the Gold King Mine spill and theproblem of acid mine drainage. We found that students in these two departments not onlythought about the problem differently between teams but between departments. We also foundthat students took agency over the experiences of stakeholders as they considered stakeholderneeds, and identified community outreach and community resources as key constraints on theirfinal designs.Introduction and research purposeDesign challenges are difficult for students because of the nature of these problems. They are ill-structured [1], meaning there are many possible satisfactory solutions, as well as many possiblepaths toward a solution, requiring designers to frame the
was done to a population of students at the university X. Thesestudents were identified as at-risk college freshmen by the office of student affairs. Once thestudents are identified then the college sends out different ways of communication (email, phonecalls, and text messages). In the year of 2021and 2022 a total of 484 at-risk students were askedif they wished to participate in the Boostcamp. A total of 122 students replied they wouldparticipate. However, not all students who accepted came, and not all students who came to thecamp finished it. Hence, three different categories of students were identified. 1. Students who agreed to participate and COMPLETED boostcamp (COMP), 2. Students who agreed to PARTICIPATE and did NOT COMPLETE the
EM.IntroductionEntrepreneurship education has been regarded as an important component of undergraduatetraining programs in the last decade [1], including in engineering education [2]. For example,94% or above of faculty and academic administrators believe that students should have access toinnovation and entrepreneurship opportunities via electives and/or extracurricular activities,despite their personal engagement level in those opportunities [2]. Most respondents in the study,however, identify challenges to making entrepreneurship a core component of curriculum, with a“lack of room in curriculum” reported as the most common challenge [2].The author(s) acknowledge The Kern Family Foundation’s support and collaboration through theKern Entrepreneurial Engineering Network