are discussedThe “Science of Team Science (SciTS)” is emerging as a research area to explore how large-scale research (initiated in the medical research context) endeavors can be best accomplishedacross multiple institutions and potentially hundreds of colleagues 1–3. The Science of TeamScience literature has high value in studying collaborations in engineering and particularly theways in which students learn to become collaborative members of their research teams. SciTSfindings have only recently been introduced in an engineering and graduate engineering studenteducational context 3. Most of these studies promote competency- or logistical- bases forsuccess: that by having the right conditions for success, all teams will be able to be
the skill-sets required of engineers to grow from: a) Early-career level engineering leadership responsibilities [Project engineering levels I - III] b) Mid-career level engineering leadership responsibilities [Technical program leadership levels IV-VI] c) Senior-career level engineering leadership responsibilities [Technology policy leadership levels VII-IX] This educational transformation will enable an opportunity for experienced graduate engineers to grow through the professional master of engineering (M.Eng.) and the professional doctor of engineering (D.Eng.) levels of proficiency while the degreed engineer continues his or her full-time employment in industry. Also
important factor in a potential faculty member’s decision to join.Additionally, PhD students play a vital role in mentorship of undergraduate students, serving asteaching assistants in courses and as mentors in the laboratory. Graduate students can beparticularly influential role models for undergraduates considering research careers. Finally,graduate students that go on to successful careers in a variety of sectors plays a crucial part inexpanding the reputation of the School. Their success is a direct reflection of the laboratoriesand faculty that mentored them.Just as important as the number of graduate students is the diversity of the student body. TheNational Science Foundation (NSF), other members of the National Academies, and the USCongress
addressing writing issues of students. In addition, Jenkins (1993) found thatgraduate faculty members would re-write anywhere from 11-25% of their students’ theses. Thus,it appears that advisors tend to take on more an role of copy editor than that of writing mentor.The strategies listed above are not necessarily sustainable for graduate faculty nor supportive tostudents who are learning to create an academic and professional “writing persona” (Becker,1986) as well as taking on a “authorial voice” (Hyland, 2002).Engineering-Based Graduate Writing CentersOne writing support initiative that has been undertaken in Colleges of Engineering has been thedevelopment of college-specific writing centers, with the few institutions that have
during their graduate program. The findings ofthis work suggested several common themes within the experiences of returners and provided auseful starting point for a more broad-scale investigation. These themes were clustered based ondifferent aspects of returners’ identity, including their identity as scholars, as individual students,as members of the student community, and as whole people. Themes also emerged that describedthe transition in identity that took place as returners made and executed the decision to return toschool2. Further analysis showed that Expectancy Value Theory (EVT) was a suitable frameworkfor interpretation of the data4. This interpretation yielded several interesting findings. First, it wasfound that the returners had a
stories as a group. The thematicanalysis section of the paper is useful when considering the larger implications of this research.For example, by examining how all participants reflect on their graduate school experience andwhat they wish would have been different, we can provide insight to current graduate studentsand their advisors. Graduate students might feel empowered to pursue a teaching opportunitydespite it taking away time from research, and advisors might consider different ways ofsupporting their graduate students to achieve their career goals.Six new engineering assistant professors, two females and four males, were interviewed as partof a larger research project exploring the pathway to and current experiences of faculty membersat
dissertations.Data Collection. An interview protocol was developed and piloted with two recently graduatedreturners to test the strength of questions and understand the breadth of possible answers. Wemade minor changes to the interview protocol based on the pilot.Next, data were collected using semi-structured interviews organized by the protocol which isconversational in nature, covering the areas of previous writing experience, transfer of writingexperience, and personal perspectives associated with their transition in writing style (SeeAppendix A). The graduate student researcher interviewed each participant separately ininterviews that lasted approximately one hour. Interviews were audio-recorded.Data Analysis. The data were analyzed for emergent themes
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
apply classroom knowledge in newsettings;1 explore or confirm major choices and career pathway;2,3 and prepare for graduatestudy.4–6 Participating in undergraduate research can also help retain and engage students,particularly those in populations that are historically underrepresented in STEM (Science,Technology, Engineering, Math).7–10 One important component of successful undergraduateresearch experiences is that students are able to develop a mentoring relationship with faculty,graduate students, and/or other researchers who can provide guidance during the researchprocess.1,11–15 Often, these mentoring relationships persist over time and become a source offeedback and support as students navigate academic, professional and personal
Page 25.685.2guidance of a faculty member.6 Developing relationships with faculty and graduate students canalso help undergraduates learn more about graduate school and graduate-level research.3,7Indeed, the National Science Foundation calls undergraduate research “one of the most effectiveavenues for attracting talented undergraduates to, and retaining them in careers in, science andengineering, including careers in teaching and education research.”8By engaging in an undergraduate research experience, students can make gains in academic,cognitive, and personal development. Through their research opportunity and interactions withfaculty, graduate students, and peers, students advance their knowledge and understanding of asubject area, develop
who had a half-time release for graduate programresponsibilities coordinated the program. The assistant dean worked with a graduate educationcommittee to review applications and make policy decisions. The assistant dean positionreported directly to the dean.Nearly all of the twenty-eight students enrolled in the program at that time were part-timestudents, primarily working adults returning to school for an advanced degree to further theircareer goals or expand their opportunities.By Fall of 2008 there were 69 students in the major (which included a few non-degree seekingstudents). Of those 69 total students, 22 were female, the remaining 47 male. Nineteen of the69 were fulltime students. The average enrollment load was around 6 hours (2
STEAM-inspired interdisciplinary studio course. Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference. Atlanta, GA.6. McCord, R., Hixson, C., Ingram, E. L., & McNair, L. D. (2014). Graduate student and faculty member: An exploration of career and personal decisions. Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference. Indianapolis, IN.7. Delamont, S. (2007). Arguments against auto-ethnography. In British Educational Research Association Annual Conference (Vol. 5, p. 8).8. Holt, N. L. (2008). Representation, legitimation, and autoethnography: An autoethnographic writing story. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 2(1), 18-28.9. Ellis, C., Adams, T
teaching career by teaching several labs as a graduate teaching assistant and later on as an adjunct faculty. While at Towson University, he also cultivated good friendships with his advisors and now mentors: Dr. Rajeswari M. Kolagani and Dr. David Schaefer. His research led to his first publication a few years later. Forced by destiny, he ended up at Norfolk State University where he is now pursuing a PhD degree in Material Science focusing on optical characterization of materials for energy harvesting. Through the IGERT fellowship, he is pursuing his ultimate goal of becoming a professor and intends to carry on research in optical materials. - See more at: https://www.asee.org/public/person#sthash.lcrL5s3P.dpufMr. IRVING
of adaptations in the course based on industry feedback. The paper concludes with asection on lessons, challenges and possible solutions that can be adopted.Course SettingEvolution of the courseTo keep up with the changing landscape in graduate studies and to ensure students are well prepared forthe demands in the industry, the graduate faculty members at KSP initiated an advisory board meetingand worked towards adopting their recommendations in the PMT program with a review cycle of 3 years.Industry advisory boards differ in purpose and in what they contribute. According to Windsor et al.(1992) advisory board contributions are valued in the following areas: a) share advice, such as hiringtrends or skills needed among graduates; b) add
, participantswere most interested in faculty positions but that interest decreased over time (M = 3.60 to 3.33). Theirinterest in obtaining an industry research position increased over time (M = 3.40 to 4.33) and it was thehighest among other options (e.g., a faculty position, a research position in a university, start-up) in Year3. From the responses to an open-ended question, it seemed that participants got into the program with asolid career goal, primarily a faculty position, but they changed their mind as they became more aware ofspecific interests they had. “Upon first entering the graduate program, I had complete desire to enter academia and become a professor. However, I am the type of person who likes to try new things, and
Foundation (NSF)ADVANCE grant, which works to align University policies and practices to promote inclusionand increase the recruitment and retention of women faculty in science.6 The primaryfacilitator’s background was in higher education and she was experienced at designing andevaluating co-curricular programs. The primary facilitator took the lead role in developing thecurriculum; facilitating the discussions; and designing, deploying and evaluating the assessmentinstruments.The secondary facilitator was an academic staff member with an earned PhD in Engineering andresearch experience in engineering education and graduate student development. The secondaryfacilitator was responsible for developing the initial grant proposal, including the
been explored. For example, some researchersproposed using citation as a measurement, such as relative citation counts among universities 3and h-index 4 , to evaluate the research quality of graduate programs in a particular field. Barnett etal 5 proposed the use of faculty hiring networks as an indicator in the university program ranking.Lopes et al 6 proposed a social network analysis on university ranking based on the internalcollaborations among universities.We propose a methodology to generate rankings of university programs from what we call a“hiring graph”. The hiring graph is basically a directed social graph revealing the employmentrelationships of Ph.D.s among universities. The hiring graph consists of different universityprograms as