Paper ID #26276I Have a Ph.D.! Now What? A Program to Prepare Engineering Ph.D.’s andPostdoctoral Fellows for Diverse Career OptionsTeresa J. Didiano, University of Toronto Teresa Didiano is the Special Programs Coordinator at the Troost Institute for Leadership Education in Engineering at the University of Toronto. She develops and coordinates leadership programs for under- graduate students, graduate students, and engineering professionals. Teresa has an HBSc and MSc from the University of Toronto, and Life Skills Coaching Certification from George Brown College.Ms. Lydia Wilkinson, University of Toronto Lydia
. Her interests in scholarship of teaching include cross- curricular innovation.Dr. Raju S. Dandu, Kansas State University - Polytechnic Campus Raju Dandu is the Director of Bulk Solids Innovation Center and Professor of Mechanical Engineering Technology of the School of Integrated Studies of Kansas State University Polytechnic. As the Direc- tor, he manages the industry-university research, education, training, and full-scale testing activities of the storage and pneumatic conveying of bulk solids such as sugar, starch, minerals, chemicals, pigments, fillers, plastic resin, and recycled plastics. His professional interests in engineering are product design and development, CE Certification, 16-bit medical imaging
Paper ID #26898Revising the Dissertation Institute: Contextual Factors Relevant to Transfer-abilityMr. Juan M. Cruz, Virginia Tech Juan M. Cruz is an assistant professor of Electronic Engineering at Universidad Javeriana in Colombia and a Ph.D. candidate of Engineering Education at Virginia Tech. He has a B.S. in Electronic Engineering and a Masters in Education from Universidad Javeriana in Colombia, His research interests include using system thinking to understand how instructional change occurs, faculty development process, and faculty and students motivation.Ms. Mayra S. Artiles , Virginia Tech Mayra S. Artiles is
underrepresented groups in engineering, effectiveness of active learning strategies, and engineering in PK-12 education.Alin Wakefield, University of California, Davis Alin Wakefield serves as the Research and Graduate Studies Development Coordinator in the College of Engineering at UC Davis.Dr. Jean S. VanderGheynst, University of Massachusetts, Dartmouth Jean VanderGheynst is Dean of the College of Engineering and Professor of Bioengineering at the Uni- versity of Massachusetts, Dartmouth, and Adjunct Professor of Biological and Agricultural Engineering at the University of California, Davis. Prior to joining UMass Dartmouth, she was Executive Associate Dean for Research and Graduate Studies in the College of Engineering and
Paper ID #26450Creating a Successful Pathway to Graduate Studies: The Student IntegratedIntern Research Experience (SIIRE)Dr. Carol S. Gattis, University of Arkansas Dr. Carol Gattis is the Associate Dean Emeritus of the Honors College and an adjunct Associate Pro- fessor of Industrial Engineering at the University of Arkansas. Her academic research focuses on STEM education, developing programs for the recruitment, retention and graduation of a diverse population of students. Carol also serves as a consultant specializing in new program development and grants. She earned her bachelor’s, master’s and Ph.D. degrees in
Paper ID #27132Impact of Research Experience Programs on National and International Un-dergraduate Engineering StudentsDr. Jacques C. Richard, Texas A&M University Dr. Richard got his Ph. D. at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, 1989 & a B. S. at Boston University, 1984. He was at NASA Glenn, 1989-1995, worked at Argonne National Lab, 1996-1997, taught at Chicago State University, 1997-2002. Dr. Richard is a Sr. Lecturer & Research Associate in Aerospace Engi- neering @ Texas A&M since 1/03. His research is focused on computational plasma modeling using spectral and lattice Boltzmann methods for studying
expectations. Engagement according toSmith et al.’s [11] model depends on the effectiveness of teams, as students work in learningcontexts that require high activity and problem-solving. In addition to these functional definitions of engagement, an assessment instrument hasalso been developed in order to standardize definitions and measurement of engagement in highereducation. The National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) was developed in 2000 to assessundergraduate student engagement [21]. It consists of four themes with indicators that defineengagement: (1) academic challenge, with the indicators of higher-order learning, reflective &integrative learning, learning strategies, and quantitative reasoning; (2) learning with peers, withthe
invaluable feedback and guidance. References[1] J. Hunt & D. Eisenberg, “Mental health problems and help-seeking behavior among college students,” Journal of Adolescent Health, 46(1), pp. 3-10, 2010.[2] J. McFarlan, et al., “The Condition of Education 2018,” NCES 2018-144. U.S. Department of Education. Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2018.[3] J. Hefner & D. Eisenberg, “Social support and mental health among college students,” American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 79(4), pp. 491-499, 2009.[4] K. Hyun, B. Quinn, T. Madon, & S. Lustig, “Graduate student mental health: Needs assessment and utilization of counseling services
Cyberspace) universities are offering graduate degrees in cybersecurity,” IEEE Spectr., vol. 51, no. 6, pp. 26–26, Jun. 2014.[2] A. Bicak, X. (Michelle) Liu, and D. Murphy, “Cybersecurity Curriculum Development: Introducing Specialties in a Graduate Program,” Inf. Syst. Educ. J., vol. 13, no. 3, p. 2015.[3] S. A. Kumar and S. Alampalayam, “Designing a graduate program in information security and analytics,” in Proceedings of the 15th Annual Conference on Information technology education - SIGITE ’14, 2014, pp. 141–146.[4] M. Ardis and N. R. Mead, “The Development of a Graduate Curriculum for Software Assurance,” in Proceedings of the Seventeenth Americas Conference on Information Systems, 2011.[5] M
, June 14-17, 2015, Seattle, WA5. J. Duke and D. Morris, 2002, “Assessing Undergraduate Mechanics Courses”, Proceedings of the 2002 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, June 16-19, 2002, Montreal, Canada6. D. Meyer,2006, “Strategies for Assessing Course Specific Outcomes”, Proceedings of the 2006 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, June 18-21, 2006, Chicago, IL7. M. Sanders, M. Thompson, M. El-Sayed, L. King, and M. Lindquist, 2006, “Assessing Interdisciplinary Engineering Capstone Project” Proceedings of the 2006 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, June 18-21, 2006, Chicago, IL8. S. Beyerlein, D. Davis, P. Thompson, M. Trevisian, and O. Harrison, 2006, “Assessment Framework for Capstone Design Courses”, Proceedings of
based on where you are (e.g., academia, industry, national lab, or other places). 3. How does a student's ability to think interdisciplinarily within the ePortfolio influence ote. Provide the response based on where their competitiveness for future positions? N you are (e.g., academia, industry, national lab, or other places).For each student’s ePortfolio, employers were invited to point out the strength(s) and areas ofimprovement(s). Inputs for the following two survey questions answered RQ3 (i.e., what areemployers’ suggestions on developing an ePortfolio?). 4. What are the strengths of this student’s ePortfolio? Note. Provide the response based on where you are (e.g
composition. The comprehensive revieweffort has gained traction and the first author has been asked to lead a university taskforce, onwhich the co-author has agreed to participate, to create a written comprehensive review ingraduate admissions plan for the university. Our goal is to create a plan that is adjustable basedon the needs and desired outcomes of each program.References[1] D. J. Ernst, E. Collins, A. Burger, and K. Stassun. (1/29/2018). Fisk-Vanderbilt Master's-to-Ph.D. Bridge Program. Available: http://fisk-vanderbilt-bridge.org/[2] C. Miller and K. Stassun, "A test that fails," Nature, vol. 510, pp. 303-304, 6/12/2014 2014.[3] K. G. Stassun, S. Sturm, K. Holley-Bockelmann, A. Burger, D. J. Ernst, and D. Webb
merits of the Doctor of Engineering in Engineering degree,and its purpose in training engineers to become professional managers in a technical field.Program HistoryThe Doctor of Engineering degree program was created in the mid-1980’s as the college’s firstprofessional doctoral degree. It went through administrative revisions in the late 1980’s to becomethe program it is today. There were very few professional doctoral programs in the country at thattime. Most of the interest in professional degrees was at the master’s level. It is important to note,as well, that the title of the degree does not have the same meaning at all institutions and in allcountries. Some use the Doctor of Engineering title for a research-based engineering
. Williams, C. C. L. Wang, Y. C. Shin, S. Zhang, and P. D. Zavattieri, “The status, challenges, and future of additive manufacturing in engineering,” CAD Comput. Aided Des., vol. 69, pp. 65–89, 2015.[3] E. Vazquez, M. Passaretti, and P. Valenzuela, “3D opportunity for the talent gap,” Deloitte Insights, 2016.[4] D. L. D. Bourell, J. J. Beaman, M. C. Leu, and D. W. Rosen, “A brief history of additive manufacturing and the 2009 roadmap for additive manufacturing: looking back and looking ahead,” US-Turkey Work. Rapid Technol., pp. 5–11, 2009.[5] T. W. Simpson, C. B. Williams, and M. Hripko, “Preparing industry for additive manufacturing and its applications: Summary & recommendations from a National Science
feedback,” and that “a diverse groupwill correct things you don't recognize”. The continued exposure to multiple perspectives helpedstudents view their work in a new way. One student shared, “it makes me think [about] mycommunication in a more critical way, as different people have different points of view to theinformation being presented.” Students noted that the group had helped them develop audienceawareness as they were “better able to anticipate how others may perceive what” they presentand helped them to “think of a way to present more clearly to people in different backgrounds.”4.1.2 growing as communicators Students frequently noted that the PRG helped them become “more effectivecommunicator[s].” This ranged from general
increased when students have easyaccess to the learning management system.While our literature review provided us with general guidance on developing online courses, wefound no studies discussing online courses for Ph.D. students. We were particularly interested inPh.D. level courses that require reading, analysis, discussion, and writing with feedback.We hoped to answer three questions ourselves: (1) Given the Ph.D.’s students’ high levels ofmotivation, what kind of environment would foster their engagement in online courses? (2)How can an institution best support faculty members for designing, developing, and deliveringthis kind of course? (3) What are the students’ experiences in these courses?Developing Online Courses for the Graduate
,which, in turn develops stronger disciplinary discourse and acceptance within the disciplinecommunity. To meet the needs of instructors, we are concurrently developing and validating a“short form” of this survey that will be deployed online to help all engineering students determinetheir writing profile, such that they can, with the help of instructors, develop strategies to overcometheir individual issues with writing. References[1] C. G. P. Berdanier, A. Tally, S. E. Branch, B. Ahn, and M. F. Cox, “A Strategic Blueprint for the Alignment of Doctoral Competencies with Disciplinary Expectations,” Int. J. Eng. Educ., vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 1759–1773, 2016.[2] J. Watson and J. Lyons
Paper ID #27849Transition Zone: a Training Ethos Designed to Scaffold a Ph.D. SegreeDr. Carmen Torres-S´anchez, Loughborough University Dr Torres-S´anchez is an Associate Professor at Loughborough University, England, United Kingdom, and the Executive Director of the Centre of Doctoral Training in Embedded Intelligence (CDT-EI). She is the architect of the novel Doctoral Transition ZoneTM Training ethos. She has been working in industry- informed, academically-led education for more than 10 years. Her research interests are in the design and manufacture of multifunctional materials with tailored properties to meet
development.References[1] S. Aguirre-Covarrubias, E. Arellano, and P. Espinoza, “‘A pesar de todo’ (DespiteEverything): The Persistence of Latina Graduate Engineering Students at a Hispanic-ServingInstitution,” New Dir. High. Educ., vol. 2015, no. 172, pp. 49–57, Dec. 2015.[2] V. Borum vborum@spelman. ed. and E. Walker, “What Makes the Difference? BlackWomen’s Undergraduate and Graduate Experiences in Mathematics,” J. Negro Educ., vol. 81,no. 4, pp. 366–378, Fall 2012.[3] S. S. Canetto, C. D. Trott, J. J. Thomas, and C. A. Wynstra, “Making Sense of theAtmospheric Science Gender Gap: Do Female and Male Graduate Students Have DifferentCareer Motives, Goals, and Challenges?,” J. Geosci. Educ., vol. 60, pp. 408–416, Nov. 2012.[4] J. Jacobson
ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2008, pp. xxi, 232 p.[7] S. L. Gassman, M. A. Maher, B. Timmerman, and C. E. Pierce, "Pedagogical Techniques to Promote Development of Graduate Engineering Students as Disciplinary Writers," (in English), 2013 ASEE Annual Conference, 2013.[8] A. Lee and R. Murray, "Supervising writing: Helping postgraduate students develop as researchers," (in English), Innovations in Education and Teaching International, vol. 52, no. 5, pp. 558-570, Sep 3 2015.[9] S. L. Gassman, M. A. Maher, and B. E. Timmerman, "Supporting Students' Disciplinary Writing in Engineering Education," (in English), International Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 29, no. 5, pp. 1270-1280
encourage instructors to engage more often in interrogative approaches to learning, rather thanlimiting themselves to the easier, but possibly less substantive, interactions that might occur in aFigure 8: Timeline of interactions in traditional classroom and Live Platform environment for in-struction of identical content by the same instructor over a 10-minute interval. Instructor speakingis shown in orange and student(s) speaking is shown in blue.Table 4: Comparison of interactions in traditional classroom and Live Platform environment forinstruction of identical content by the same instructor over a 10-minute interval. Activity Traditional classroom Live Platform environment total
participants, as one noted saying thatleadership coaching, “Relatively independent, but improved me in general, including [within theprogram].” Value of leadership coaching sessions Experience visiting the classroom Classroom supply ordering Lunch food Quality of other teams' practice presentations Feedback from your practice presentation Communcation from your teacher Communication from your partner/s 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Excellent Good Okay Below average PoorFigure 3. Participants’ ratings of components of the program, N=34. The 15
: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2010.516356[9] T. Bourner, R. Bowden and S. Laing, “Professional doctorates in England,” Studies inHigher Education, Vol. 26, No. 1, pp. 65-83. 2001.[10] National Center for Education Statistics. Glossary: Doctor’s Degree-ProfessionalPractice. (n.d.). Available: https://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/glossary/index.asp?id=942[11] K. Newton, Proposal for a Doctor of Technology Degree. Unpublished proposalsubmitted to Purdue University Graduate School. West Lafayette, IN. April 2017.[12] T.G. Gill and U. Hoppe, “The Business Professional Doctorate as an Informing Channel:A Survey and Analysis,” International Journal of Doctoral Studies, Vol. 4, 27-31, 2009,Available: http://www.ijds.org/Volume4/IJDSv4p027-057Gill267.pdf[13
entirety and dropped into another institutional framework. The committee advisesfaculty who are contemplating embarking on a similar program development or renewal processat their own institution is to adapt the model, not adopt it. The process is key, not the particularsthat this process achieved when applied in one specific context.References CitedAmerican Society for Engineering Education - Student Division (ASEE-SD) and the Center for Engineering Learning and Teaching (CELT). (2019). Engineering Education Community Resource Wiki. Available at: http://engineeringeducationlist.pbworks.com/Biggs, J. (1999). Teaching for quality learning at university. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.Borrego, M., and Cutler, S. (2010). Constructive