Paper ID #27581Science, Engineering, and Mathematics Graduate Student Mental Health:Insights from the Healthy Minds Network DatasetMs. Sarah Jane Bork, University of Michigan Sarah received her B.S. and M.S. in Electrical and Computer Engineering from the Ohio State University in 2017. She is now at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, where she is beginning her PhD in Engineering Education Research, with an emphasis on graduate engineering students’ mental health.Dr. Joi-Lynn Mondisa, University of Michigan Joi Mondisa is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Industrial & Operations Engineering at the University
-value and moreinnovative designs than his or her peers.This has meant designing a sustainable program with these stakeholders in mind: leadingand innovative local employers, engineering graduates, and academia. Each of thesestakeholders requires a specially attenuated message aimed at their particular perspectiveas to the role of leading design engineers. In particular, to involve academia in this processmeans that they too must be able to evaluate not only the technical competence of designfrom within a positivist1 paradigm but also the creative aspects of the work.Herein lies the difficulty. Engineering faculties, such as ours in a research-intensiveinstitution, has no experience or understanding of creative aspects of engineering designand
read andreflected on the co-operative inquiry method before and was keen to explore the inquiry domain:experiences of ESL students in the engineering education discipline. Then, the initiatorresearcher called for collaborators who were likely to share the keenness of the topic. After the collaborators responded to the initiator’s call, the initiator talked to eachindividual separately and discussed the goal in mind and asked for their insights and feedback.The first meeting was then scheduled and all the researchers participated. We talked about theindividual’s interest in this topic, the detail of what this co-operative inquiry is in terms ofdefining the phases of experiencing and reflecting and the procedures for conducting the
Paper ID #18832How Six Assistant Professors Landed Their Jobs at Baccalaureate Collegesand Master’s Institutions: A Focus on Pathways and Teaching (Un)preparednessMs. Natascha M. Trellinger, Purdue University, West Lafayette (College of Engineering) Natascha Trellinger is a Ph.D. candidate in the School of Engineering Education at Purdue University. She received her B.S. in Aerospace Engineering from Syracuse University. At Purdue, Natascha is a member of the Global Engineering Education Collaboratory (GEEC) and is particularly interested in teaching conceptions and methods and graduate level engineering education.Prof. Brent K
transformation in the field” (Atman, Turns, & Yasuhara, 2017). As individuals wholive in relationship with others, we find ourselves to be natural storytellers. As Cron (2012)described, “story evolved as a way to explore our own minds and the minds of others, as a sort ofdress rehearsal for the future” (p. 9). With this growing community practice of storytelling(Adams et. al, 2007), we seek to articulate our own pathway story into the engineering educationresearch enterprise, so we may engage others in our work, inspire future doctoral students, andprepare ourselves for future research and teaching practice.We adopted a theoretical and action-oriented approach to build our understanding of “our story”and to use inquiry sessions as an outlet for
Paper ID #16704Engineering Portfolios: Value, Use, and ExamplesDr. Vincent Wilczynski, Yale University Vincent Wilczynski is the Deputy Dean of the Yale School of Engineering and Applied Science and the James S. Tyler Director of the Yale Center for Engineering Innovation & Design. As the Deputy Dean, he helps plan and implement all academic initiatives at the School. In addition, he manages the School’s teaching and research resources and facilities. As the James S. Tyler Director of the Center for Engineer- ing Innovation & Design he leads the School’s efforts to promote collaboration, creativity, design and
2006-16: ON THE STRUCTURING OF THE GRADUATE ENGINEERINGDISQUISITIONDavid Wells, North Dakota State University David L. Wells has been a manufacturing engineer for over four decades, roughly equally divided between industrial and academic employment. He has been Professor of Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering at North Dakota State University since January 2000. Prior to this appointment, he served in a manufacturing engineering and education post at Focus: HOPE for six years and on the faculty of University of Cincinnati for fifteen years. His early career included some twenty years in research and development, manufacturing engineering and production management in the power generation
AC 2008-892: A HANDS-ON COURSE ON TEACHING ENGINEERINGSusan Montgomery, University of Michigan Susan Montgomery is a lecturer and program advisor in the Chemical Engineering Dept. at the University of Michigan. She earned a BSEChE from the University of Michigan, and PhD ChE from Princeton University. She is the ASEE Campus representative and faculty advisor to the ASEE graduate student group. She leads a team of students developing educational software for chemical engineering. Page 13.47.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2008 A Hands-on Course on Teaching
. 2000;34(1):16–25.4. National Science Foundation. Introduction to the IGERT program. 2013. Available at: www.nsf.gov/crssprgm/igert/intro.jsp.5. Bransford JD, Brown AL, Cocking RR, eds. How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School. National Academy Press; 2000.6. Jamieson L, Lohmann JR. Innovation with impact: Creating a Culture for Scholarly and Systematic Innovation in Engineering Education. Washington, DC; 2012.7. Jamieson L, Lohmann J. Creating a Culture for Scholarly and Systematic Innovation in Engineering Education. Washington, DC; 2009.8. Lemke J. Cognition, context, and learning: A social semiotic perspective. In: Kirshner D, Whitson J, eds. Situated Cognition: Social, Semiotic, and
Education Annual Conference & Exposition13 Beams, D. and Niiler, L., How Engineering Students Learn to Write: Fourth Year Findings and Summary of theUT-Tyler Engineering Writing Initiative, Proceedings of the 2009 American Society for Engineering EducationConference & Exposition.14 Daniell, Figliola, Moline and Young, Learning to Write: Experiences with Technical Writing Pedagogy Within aMechanical Engineering Curriculum , Proceedings of the 2003 American Society for Engineering Education AnnualConference & Exposition.15 http://wwwhomemorals.com/moral-value/honesty/why-is-academic-honesty-important.html16 Miller, F.P.,Vandome, A.F., McBrewster, J. (2010) Mind map. Mauritius: VDM Publishing.17 Craig, J., Writing Strategies for
25.632.5 Proceedings of the 2012 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2012, American Society for Engineering Education Figure 1 – Percentage of Faculty with Doctorate from the Home InstitutionTraditionally, PhD programs place emphasis on providing teaching and research opportunities tostudents as preparation for academic careers.For those that move into finding alternate non-academic careers, additional skill training mayprove useful. Thus the program could focus on training of the mind, student development,graduate internships, structured required courses in entrepreneurship, global education andresearch, presentation, proposal and report writing and
). How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School: Expanded Edition, Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. 4. Cox, M.F., London, J.S., Ahn, B., Zhu, J., Torres-Ayala, A.T., Frazier, S., & Cekic, O. (2011) Attributes of Success for Engineering Ph.D.s: Perspectives from Academia and Industry, 2011 Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education (10 pages). 5. Ahn, B., Zhu, J., Cox, M.F., London, J.S., & Branch, S. (2013). Recommendations for Engineering Doctoral Education: Design of an Instrument to Evaluate Change. 2013 Proceedings of the Frontiers in Education Conference, Oklahoma City, OK. 6. Pruitt-Logan, A. S., Gaff, J. G., Jentoft, J. E. (2002). Preparing
K CASHWELL Jr, Norfolk State University Irving Cashwell Jr. was born and raised in Chesapeake VA. His introduction into electronics engineer- ing originated in HS via an electronics coarse at Indian River highs School while playing sports year round; basketball volleyball and tennis. Irving began his college career close to his family at Norfolk State University (NSU) obtaining an undergraduate and master’s degree in Electronics Engineering while also focusing on becoming better in mind, body and spirt. He enjoys sharing his unique perspective of life through the art of photography. Irving’s master’s work at Norfolk state university, under Aswini Pradhan, focused on high-k dielectrics, high electron mobility
world to make new things.”Methods Focus Group Protocol. We developed a semi-structured focus group protocol to gain insightsinto the content, character, and complications associated with efforts to develop Research EngineerIdentity (REI) among graduate students in general and students from underrepresented groups inparticular. Before the focus groups began, we facilitated a “twenty statements test” to elicit the salience ofself-meanings associated with being a research engineer. Participants were asked to write down the firsttwenty things that came to mind in response to the following question: “As an engineer that conductsresearch, I am someone who…”. Next, we briefly informed participants about the overall goal of the study
there will few to no traditional face-to-face courses. They feel allcourses will contain some digital gathering and communication tools [3].With those questions in mind, the authors began to design and develop a fully online MaterialsScience course. The goal was to create a Design for Online (DFO) process that would bevaluable in distance and eventually on-ground courses throughout the college of engineering.II. BackgroundFor the past few years, the college of engineering has offered graduate online course sections asappendages to the face-to-face delivery of those courses. In-person lectures (75 minutes, twice aweek) have been recorded and housed in an online catalogue for remote students to access. Thisarea of the course shell in the LMS
Paper ID #25266Graduate Engineering Peer Review Groups: Developing Communicators andCommunityKelly J. Cunningham, University of Virginia Kelly Cunningham is the director of the Graduate Writing Lab in the School of Engineering and Ap- plied Science at the University of Virginia. She holds a PhD in applied linguistics & technology and human-computer interaction (co-majors) from Iowa State University of Science & Technology and an MA in intercultural studies/TESOL. She has worked with ESL students since 2007 and in graduate com- munication support since 2014. Her research draws from qualitative methods, appraisal
Paper ID #14573Professional Science Graduate Program Revolutionizes the Educational Ex-perience of EngineersDr. Saeed D. Foroudastan, Middle Tennessee State University Dr. Saeed Foroudastan is the Associate Dean for the College of Basic and Applied Sciences (CBAS). The CBAS oversees 10 departments at Middle Tennessee State University. He is also the current Director for the Masters of Science in Professional Science program and a professor of engineering technology at MTSU. Foroudastan received his B.S. in civil engineering, his M.S. in civil engineering, and his Ph.D. in mechanical engineering from Tennessee
Paper ID #18996Applying to Graduate School in Engineering: A Practical GuideDr. Katy Luchini-Colbry, Michigan State University Katy Luchini-Colbry is the Director for Graduate Initiatives at the College of Engineering at Michigan State University, where she completed degrees in political theory and computer science. A recipient of a NSF Graduate Research Fellowship, she earned Ph.D. and M.S.E. in computer science and engi- neering from the University of Michigan. She has published more than two dozen peer-reviewed works related to her interests in educational technology and enhancing undergraduate education through hands
Paper ID #34637Visualizing Arguments to Scaffold Graduate Writing in EngineeringEducationDr. Kristen Moore, University at Buffalo, The State University of New York Kristen R. Moore is an Associate Professor in the Department of Engineering Education at University at Buffalo. Her research focuses primarily on technical communication and issues of equity, inclusion, and social justice. She is the author of Technical Communication After the Social Justice Turn: Building Coalitions for Action (2019), in addition to a range of articles. She has received a number of awards for her research, including the Joenk Award for the best
focuses on the nature of engineering; engineering habits of mind, how engineering knowledge is created and shared and how it is learned especially outside the classroom. Over the past 30 years, he has conducted field research on the practice of engineering design, new product development and innovation in variety of industries, in large and small firms with an emphasis on design thinking, most recently in relation to sustainability. He also studies engineering education as a complex system, and the design and evaluation of next generation learning environments. This research is intrinsically multidisciplinary and draws on methodologies from the humanities, social and behavioral sciences and involves collaboration with
class too and tried to be a better listener. − WilliamFinally, Ethan's frustrations with the expectations of faculty add a different dimension to thedissonance experienced by our research participants: There was a little frustration at times with that as being the person that various profs would turn to and say, „Well, how does an engineer think?‟ I don‟t know, I just worked as an engineer. It didn‟t mean I sat back and thought about how I was - there was no meta cognition going on there. It‟s just I was doing it, likewise, just because you‟ve practiced as an engineer doesn‟t mean you‟ve decoded the mind of an engineer. − EthanThe dissonance experienced by our research participants with their peers and
AC 2007-271: EXPLORING ACADEMIC FACTORS AFFECTING ENGINEERINGGRADUATE STUDENT RESEARCH PROFICIENCYScott Rogers, Georgia Institute of Technology Ph.D. Candidate in Environmental Engineering at the Georgia Institute of Technology (GT-EnvE) in Atlanta, Georgia. Served on the GT AEES Dialogue for Academic Excellence Committee (DAEC) as Assessment Subcommittee Chair from August 2004 to June 2005, Committee Chair from June 2005 to August 2006, and Past Committee Chair from August 2006 to present.Recep Goktas, Georgia Institute of Technology Ph.D. Candidate in GT-EnvE. Served on DAEC as Committee Secretary from August 2005 to August 2006.Ulas Tezel, Georgia Institute of Technology Ph.D
Paper ID #34925Engineering Graduate Education: An Overwhelming Journey ofFirst-Generation ImmigrantsDr. Hoda Ehsan, Georgia Institute of Technology Hoda is a postdoctoral fellow at Center for Education Integrating Science, Mathematics & Computing at Georgia Institute of Technology. She received her Ph.D. from the School of Engineering Education, Purdue. She received her B.S. in mechanical engineering in Iran, and obtained her M.S. in Childhood Education and New York teaching certification from City College of New York (CUNY-CCNY). She is now a graduate research assistant on STEM+C project. Her research interests
AC 2011-231: DETERMINING IMPACT OF A COURSE ON TEACHINGIN ENGINEERINGRobert J. Gustafson, Ohio State University Robert J. Gustafson, P.E., PhD, is Honda Professor for Engineering Education and Director of the Engi- neering Education Innovation Center in the College of Engineering and a Professor of Food, Agricultural and Biological Engineering at The Ohio State University. He has previously served at Ohio State as As- sociate Dean for Undergraduate Education and Student Services (1999-2008) and Department Chair of Food Agricultural and Biological Engineering Department (1987-1999). After being awarded his PhD. Degree from Michigan State in 1974, he joined the faculty of the Agricultural Engineering Department at
entire session,sponsored by the Minorities in Engineering Division (MIND), was devoted to discussing howresearch experiences for undergraduates could promote interest in graduate education.36,37,38,39,40The number of such programs has increased greatly, especially with the support of the NSFResearch Experiences for Undergraduates (REU) program, which specifically encourages the Page 13.706.5involvement of students drawn from underrepresented minority groups "…(African Americans,Hispanics, American Indians, Alaska Natives, and Native Hawaiians or Other Pacific Islanders.)"and which recommends involving students at early stages of their college
responsibility of the team leader to insure that all team membersunderstand the goals for the project and their contribution to achieving them. Motivating others to workwith you is crucial to the success of a project. It is a critical skill that the effective engineer-leader mustdevelop.Counseling In order to properly motivate members of team, the team leader must be mindful thatcounseling of individual team members may be required. Engineers are highly trained and self-motivated.However, a team member may not clearly understand his or her role on the project. The effectiveengineer-leader must insure that each member of the team is aware of the project goals and that success isdependent on the important contributions of each team member
responsibility.It assumed to be a prerequisite for learning. These future professors expect students to come toclass eager to learn. Four participants spoke directly about this theme. To some extent I think that students have to come to the table wanting to learn. That is something that can’t be taught. You know it’s something that through mentoring they can maybe see what the advantages that learning can give them but really I think it is their responsibility as an engineering students to come to the table wanting to learn … I think it is also up to students to commit to the learning process which is kind of the same as wanting to learn but there is a difference in my mind in that they are willing to put in the
education programs is assessment of studentperformance. The participants in the program are practicing professional engineers. They are notin a traditional academic program and they are motivated differently than traditional students.Consequently, the traditional A, B, C grading scale should not be uniformly adopted forassessment of their educational accomplishments. On the other hand, performance evaluationwithout meaningful assessment is unsatisfactory as well. Keeping this in mind, each course in thecurriculum must be considered separately and the most appropriate assessment method chosen inaccordance with the high academic standards of the program. This is a matter that requirescareful deliberation. The program goals and learning objectives
. Some of these activitiesinclude participating in training courses, or continuing education experiences from universities orprofessional organizations and on-the-job experience. Engineers typically enter the workforcewith a BS degree. One way to enable their life-long-learning skills is to expose them to graduateengineering education directly after their bachelors degree. There is a need for a professionallyoriented MS program graduates who are focused on innovation and implementation. The 4+1program was developed with just this in mind. It is a program which benefits the student,benefits the faculty who are implementing the program and benefits the society which thegraduates serve. The graduate degree provides students with unprecedented
. Page 13.409.4With these ideas in mind, the committee constructed a proposal to describe the program.The timeline for the proposal approval process is shown in Figure 1. The rest of thepaper describes the notable characteristics of the program. Figure 1. Timeline for the establishment of the program.Program OverviewThe stated objectives of the program are: ‚ Provide opportunities for qualified individuals to earn a masters degree in engineering. ‚ Establish a nationally-recognized, graduate engineering program that offers a combination of theoretical and practical educational experiences ‚ Meet the need for a comprehensive graduate engineering program in northeastern Indiana.Students in the program