required to manageprospective situations.”1 A GTA in this course will learn pedagogy and teaching skillsconcurrently. The course activities include peer observations, microteaching, observations bythe instructor which include a video capture of the student teaching, and reflective papers. Thestudent skills acquired are practice and feedback, reflecting on one’s own abilities andexperiences, course design (writing learning objectives, selecting appropriate methods andassessments, grading), and communicating with students. Research on the effectiveness ofvideo feedback as a training component indicates that it is effective in improving instructionalquality.2The learning experience for GTAs being trained to teach provides learning of the
Paper ID #19000Getting Great Recommendation Letters: 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- on
Engineering Education, 2021 Minority Student Experiences in Engineering Graduate Programs: Socialization and Impact on Career TrajectoriesAbstractThis paper examines the academic and social interactions during graduate engineering programenrollment among racially underrepresented doctoral and master’s students and how thoseinteractions shape their career goals. Using socialization theory, this study explored dailyinteractions of students with faculty and peers, overall perceptions of fit, knowledge about thegraduate school process, and opportunities for mentoring provided in the institution as well asthrough outside engagement during industry internships. The findings presented in this paperbuild upon an earlier study conducted
inquiry group consisted of the authors of this paper as co-researchers and co-subjects and is situated in our shared interest in graduate education andlearning. While we are at different stages of the doctoral program, we have the mutualexperience of completing the first year of the program at the same institution. We engaged in co-operative inquiry sessions, focused on learning within ourselves and with others, to make newmeaning from our experiences. Reflections during the formative first year of doctoral trainingwere explored as well as reflections and memos generated as part of the inquiry process.Through the co-operative inquiry process, this study offers insight into opportunities for peer-to-peer mentorship and learning enrichment in
distance delivery at peer institutions isincluded to examine research and writing requirements common in CM programs with distancedelivery. Detail of corrective actions that have been implemented with limited effect areprovided. Finally, the program change for the most recent cohort of students enrolled in theprogram to a guided capstone academic writing activity under the direction of a single facultymember is described.IntroductionGraduate education in Construction Management (CM) has been slow to develop. In the yearssince the American Council for Construction Education (ACCE) was organized in 1974 by theAmerican Institute of Constructors (AIC) and the Associated Schools of Construction (ASC), ithas accredited undergraduate programs that
further information by reading articles and booksabout various empirically tested teaching methodologies.For these reasons, it is important to expose prospective engineering faculty toconstructive discussions of effective engineering education pedagogy and theory. In thepracticum course discussed in this paper, discussions about active learning approacheswere supplemented by relevant literature reading assignments. In addition, the GTAsreflected on their teaching practices and experiences to improve student learning. Thisallowed the GTAs to collaboratively analyze their implemented teaching methodologieswith their peers. This form of formative assessment further facilitated modification ofvarious active learning approaches to best fit in
, University of Toronto, and holds the Jeffrey Skoll En- dowed Chair. He joined the FPGA Implementation Tools Group, Xilinx, Inc., San Jose, CA, USA, in 1997, where he was involved in placement, routing, and synthesis. He became a Principal Engineer at Xilinx in 2007 and joined the university in 2008. His research interests are all aspects of tools, archi- tectures, and circuits for FPGAs. He has co-authored over 90 peer-reviewed research publications, 4 book chapters, holds 29 U.S. patents, and was Program Co-Chair for FPL 2016, Program Chair for ACM FPGA 2017, and is General Chair for ACM FPGA 2018. He is Co-Founder and Chief Scientific Advisor of LegUp Computing Inc.Prof. Markus Bussmann, University of Toronto Dr
parents are frequently unable to help them navigate their educational pathway. 2) Knowing the Rules or Ambiguity: LIATFG graduate students may be unclear about the expectations of graduate study. They may perceive that their peers know the “rules of the game” while they do not know what is expected or how to navigate the system. 3) Living in Two Worlds: Families of LIATFG students are often supportive of college, but may be less understanding of the value of graduate education. LIATFG students may not feel they fully belong to either their family/culture, or within academia. 4) Seeking Support: LIATFG students can have difficulty building the necessary support systems (whether they be social, academic and/or
“somewhat successful” or “very successful” with theirimplementation. Those respondents who did not use active learning were unsure how to usethese methods in their specific class, believe that their teaching responsibilities did not allowthem to use these approaches, or did not feel as though active learning was necessary. Thispaper examines these responses further to determine whether or not their teachingresponsibilities, their confidence with a variety of teaching-related tasks (e.g., lesson planning,working with students, etc.), and use of teaching peer mentors influence their decisions toincorporate active learning into their teaching practice. Recommendations for faculty supervisorsand TA training program organizers are provided.1
an academic career. The GTFprogram currently being assessed was designed to combine elements from other successful Page 14.975.3programs into a holistic approach to graduate student training that focuses on the integration ofteaching, research and service. The research questions will be investigated using the concept of a community of practice11, 12 to address the mentoring and teaching communities, as well as the social and academicinteraction of the fellows with their mentors and peers. The final question concerning thepreparation of fellows for faculty careers will be addressed using the model of a “steward of thediscipline
and seminars; engagement in research and grant writing groups;collaboration with existing campus programs to create sustainable communities across diversegraduate student populations; and the development of research skills. This paper provides anoverview of the program and research questions that are being explored via the participation ofstudents and mentors in the program.Project Objectives and PlansThe Reinvigorating Engineering and Changing History (REACH) Scholars Program offersqualified Master’s and direct Ph.D. engineering students opportunities to explore multipleacademic pathways and to work closely with their peers, with alumni, and with faculty to createa community of scholars who will be prepared broadly for careers across
seminars covering topics in interdisciplinary Engineering research;(2) bi-weekly workshops on the graduate school application process; (3) writing assignments tohelp students clarify their interests and begin developing application materials for graduateschool; (4) individual and small-group outreach activities to encourage broader participation inSTEM (science, technology, engineering and math); (5) interdisciplinary networking events withundergraduates, graduate students, and faculty from across campus; and (6) presentation of theirresearch at a university wide research forum. These professional development activities wereimplemented as part of a 10-week summer research program for undergraduates sponsored bythe College of Engineering at
joining a research project at FSEL, a new student is assigned a desk looking out over thelab floor. For new masters’ students, the desk is located in a “bullpen” style (or cubical-farm, ifyou’d rather) room – a large room divided into five short isles with two to four desks per aisle.This personal space is highly beneficial to a new student: not only does it provide an out-of-home location to work on schoolwork, but the student is surrounded by his or her peers, who arealso newcomers to the program.A small conference room is also available to the students, which aids in teamwork for groupprojects. The room isn’t very fancy, but has enough space for five or six students to cometogether and talk, with a white-board for writing up ideas. A printer
program.The assessments are centered on the explicit objectives and criteria created for each unit, and onthe synthesis of these units. Formative assessment include abstract writing and reviewing, a 3-Minute Thesis (3MT) style presentation, an impact study, and a graduate student conference withoral presentations and posters. The assignments are not given numerical grades, but the studentsare provided with written feedback from instructors, Teaching Assistants and their peers. Oralpresentations (3MT and student conference) are judged by faculty members, and theentrepreneurship tournament finalists are judged by entrepreneurs from industry and academia.4. OutcomesTo date, the total participation across departments is over 350 graduate students. The
. ENGR0011 has an extensive writing component that involves asemester long project that produces 4 written projects and a presentation at the end of thesemester. The presentation component is integrated into the Peer Mentor component ofENGR0081. Thus, this presentation fulfills the first step or introductory exposure of publicspeaking for every student. By having the student presentation in the small mentor section, lessthan 15 students, the student‘s first public speaking experience takes place in a very friendly andinformal setting. This addresses the anxiety issue stated above. In addition, by having fourindependent writing assignments throughout the semester, that each produce a milestoneproduction, we are also addressing item 2 above, by
individual responses suggests that the task ofdrafting academic and personal statements for (potential) graduate school applications was themost burdensome assignment. In comparison, many students indicated that they found theassignment to create an academically-focused resume (appropriate for a graduate schoolapplication) helpful, in part because that assignment included a peer-review component wherestudents got immediate feedback during small group interactions.Some of these concerns have been addressed as the EnSURE program evolved over time: forinstance, writing assignments were refined to better align with students’ research activities, andmore instruction was provided on the value of interdisciplinary interactions—as well as
finalized list of competencies is shown in Table 2 These competencies werebroadly similar to our initial list shown in Table 1, but combined some of the competenciestogether and reflects specific emphases in graduate engineering education.Behaviorally Anchored Rating ScaleWhile the competency model described above is the core structure of the assessment protocol,there is a distinct need to create a framework for students, advisors, and peers to provide morespecific, behavioral feedback. Behaviorally anchored rating scales (BARS) were adopted in thecurrent study to rate performance. Typically, BARS are presented as a scale with several pointsand the rater chooses a level to indicate an individual’s current performance. One of the criticalaspects of
Paper ID #19042Energy Science and Engineering Graduate Education at Tokyo TechProf. Jeffrey Scott Cross, Tokyo Institute of Technology Jeffrey S. Cross received a Ph.D. in chemical engineering from Iowa State University in 1992. He has worked in Japan at Fujitsu Lab Ltd., National Institute for Inorganics Materials, and at Tokyo Tech for over 20 years and is fluent in Japanese. Jeffrey is Prof. in the School of Environment and Society, Dept. of Transdisciplinarity Science and Engineering and graduate coordinate for the Energy Science and Engineering Major. He teaches online courses on academic writing and on education
the semester. To varying degrees, these weekly meetings also serveas peer mentoring and community building activities among the teaching teams assigned to eachcourse. There is little communication between graduate students assigned to different courses,even among Graduate Teaching Fellows. Written, qualitative faculty evaluations were veryuseful to workshop leaders, while quantitative student evaluations using a standardized formwere not reflective of the responsibilities of workshop leaders. Recommendations includeexpanding the faculty teaching mentor role, redesigning the student feedback form, and addingsocial activities across course assignments.I. IntroductionThose holding academic faculty positions within a college or university are
within the scope of the syllabus for the course. In this study, a courserepeated over three years was considered. Students were directed to undertake engineeringdesigns in specialized areas of transportation engineering, technology and management. Designtopics related to these areas ranged from Flexible Pavements, Rigid Pavements, Asphalt PavingTechnology and Pavement Rehabilitation, to Signalized Traffic Intersections. These topicscovered not only conventional transportation systems but also intelligent transportation systems.The students’ presentations were peer-graded.The extent of improvement in design, discovery, and learning was documented extensively byapplying appropriate statistical tests. Assessment, grading formula and results are
l changes mechanism/medication began to fail. When I started writing my dissertation, I became coping coping completely paralyzed with anxiety. I started seeing a therapist, who mechanism/behaviora mechanism/behavioral referred me to a psychiatrist. I was diagnosed with ADHD and l changes/to-do-list changes Generalized Anxiety Disorder at age 32. coping coping The anxiety disorder diagnosis didn’t surprise me, but ADHD did. mechanism/behaviora mechanism/therapy
critical resource upon whichmany large research institutions rely. The GSI position also provides a pivotal opportunity fordeveloping the next generation of engineering faculty and industry leaders through training andmentoring. A centrally organized peer mentor program1 is one approach that can positivelyimpact not only the GSIs’ teaching experiences, but the peer mentors’ experiences as well.2 Thispaper evaluates the Engineering GSI Mentor (EGSM) program at the University of Michigan,which is designed to train and empower selected graduate students to provide teaching-relatedservices to their fellow GSIs. EGSMs’ duties range from consultations on a variety ofpedagogical topics to in-classroom services, such as observing a GSI’s teaching and
and non-uniform across graduate students. The result ispotentially leaving many newcomers with gaps in their knowledge regarding the processes of graduateschool. A panel of peers who can make explicit some of the implicit knowledge can help students moreconfidently navigate their environment.The literature on successful transition programs indicates that students should know what services andresources are available to them 5, 15. During these sessions, participants had the opportunity to meetwith personnel from different support departments on campus, including the university librarian who isdesignated to work with the College of Engineering, representatives from the Writing Center, and stafffrom the Graduate School who oversee diversity
design a curriculum and guides them through the process of developing a course in their field. • ENE 685 Engineering Education Methods (3 credit hours), provides students with a variety of techniques for teaching courses that are both engaging and effective. • ENE 687 Mentored Teaching in Engineering (1 credit hour), enables students to deepen their understanding of teaching and learning through feedback and reflection as they perform their regularly assigned teaching duties. • ENE 695 Succeeding as an Engineering Professor (3 credit hours), covers other skills valuable to faculty members such as writing proposals, selecting and mentoring graduate students, and managing projects.All four courses
, and tools required for classes are provided. The following are key software and servicesprovided.Software § eBooks in one Platform – Vital Source § Microsoft Office 365 § Educational Apps § Productivity AppsServices § Video Production § Closed Captioning § Mobile Device Management § Help DeskAsynchronous LearningThe entire system is set up to be asynchronous learning. This means students can log-in anytime,plan class deadlines around business travel and office projects. Student peer learning experienceis enhanced through discussion boards and group projects, all of which can be accessedasynchronously. Students can also access the MID's course contents and dedicated student servicesusing the mobile platform. These includes
area 4.48 Develop and manage budgets for research 8 projects 4.48 8 Synthesize information 4.48 8 Manage multiple projects 4.48 8 Write peer-reviewed papers 4.48 Delegate tasks/projects based on others' 9 strengths 4.43 Understand how your research fits into the 9 field more broadly 4.43 9 Create proposals 4.43 9 Write grant proposals 4.43 10 Work in teams 4.38 10 Find problems 4.38 10
(includes Peer teamwork and leadership (includes teamwork and leadership (includes Feedback form data) Peer Feedback form data) Peer Feedback form data) Appendix 2 Capstone Writing Quality Rubrics
satisfying the department that oversees the course. This type of nontraditionalgraduate education has the potential to strongly improve graduate student communication andleadership skills while teaching important educational development tactics and can contribute inthe decision to pursue an academic career. Implementing a Ph.D. student teaching program is animprovement to the traditional doctoral curriculum and will strongly enhance studentcommunication and mentoring skills.Past approaches to educating graduate students in undergraduate engineering curriculum designand instruction have been offered in the form of classes focusing on this topic1. Anotherapproach uses teaching assistant peer mentors for helping in the growth and development of the
agencies Promote interdisciplinary, collaborative work Align their programs to be more relevant to societyIndustry-to-Academia ResponsesAligned with the key points presented in the above-mentioned three groups, the participants inthis group also highlighted the importance of developing industrial experiences among students, Page 25.1101.6students writing peer-reviewed high quality publications, the establishment of a workingrelationship between mentors and students, and encourage students to work with each other.Besides these major points, the participants in this group also brought in additional insights fromworking in both industrial
c American Society for Engineering Education, 2012 Creating and Sustaining Productive Research Groups in Engineering Departments: Results from a Faculty and Future Faculty WorkshopAbstractIn July 2011, 45 engineering graduate students, postdoctoral researchers, faculty members andadministrators from 33 universities across the country met to discuss how to foster successfulengineering graduate research groups. This paper summarizes the recommendations andconclusions from this meeting. Analysis of workshop discussions yielded four major themes:clarity of expectations, attending to community, organization for group and peer learning, andstructuring student development towards independence. In