to recruit diverse students to graduate programs in engineering at theprogram’s home site. In order to develop strategies to recruit students to graduate programs atTAMU through its summer undergraduate research program, we first examined the efficacy ofthe USRG program in influencing students’ post-baccalaureate plans. Next, we examined factorsthat influence USRG participants’ selection of graduate school at the conclusion of the USRGprogram. Last, we compared the influence of the same factors for those who applied and thosewho did not apply to TAMU for graduate school, to determine strategies that universities canemploy to effectively recruit summer undergraduate research program participants to a graduateprogram in engineering at the
followed procedures discussed in Lavallee et al.6 with a few modifications,as explained later. There are eight stages in the iSLR process: 1. Review planning: Plan the review effort and training activities. 2. Question formulation: Define the research questions. 3. Search strategy: Define the review scope and search strings. 4. Selection process: Define inclusion and exclusion criteria. 5. Strength of the evidence: Define what makes a high quality paper. 6. Analysis: Extract the evidence from the selected papers. 7. Synthesis: Structure the evidence in order to draw conclusions. 8. Process monitoring: Ensure the process is repeatable and complete.6Furthermore, Lavallee et al.6
revisitthe material for several years; in the interim, she completed her doctorate, spent a year as a post-doctoral researcher while teaching as an adjunct at a regional comprehensive university, workedin industry for a time, and then accepted an academic position.BackgroundGraduate students in engineering have a variety of motivations for pursuing their education.While some are focused primarily on research and plan to continue that focus in industry oracademia, others have a strong interest in teaching, and plan to pursue an educational career at ateaching-focused institution. Some universities, in their efforts to promote outreach and expandthe population of future engineering students, recruit these graduate students into outreachprograms
in engineering and developing a betterunderstanding of their experiences and motivations as compared to direct-pathway students,those students who begin a PhD shortly after completing their undergraduate degree. This paperfocuses on the findings of this first survey phase, specifically findings related to describingreturners’ past work and education experiences, their processes for deciding to pursue a PhD andselecting an institution, information about their PhD programs, and their plans upon completingthe degree. We aim to use findings from our study to inform efforts to better recruit graduatereturners, support these students throughout their academic careers, and learn more to betterutilize their unique skills and perspectives within both
Students for the Academic Job Market through a Training Program Inspired by Peer ReviewIntroduction The existence of a gender gap in the STEM fields is very prevalent across universities inthe United States1. According to data collected by the National Science Foundation, from 2002-2012 roughly 40% of doctoral degrees in STEM fields were conferred to women, yet in 2010,women accounted for only 27% of tenure-track assistant professorships in engineering.2 Thislowered representation of women in upper divisions of academia is not due to a lack of interest.The Royal Society of Chemistry in London found in a 2006 survey that 70% of first year femalestudents planned to be in a research career, yet only 37% had that goal by their third
WTP.There were other doctoral students produced by the Department of Transportation and UrbanInfrastructure Studies. Their research projects were related to driving simulation, transit orienteddevelopment and highway safety. After graduation, many of them are working at transportation-consulting firms and state government transportation-related agencies. 6. Outcome Assessment on MSU Graduate Students Participating in NSF S-STEM GrantsAs a premier minority-serving institution, Morgan is transitioning to a doctoral researchuniversity, which is a primary goal promoted in our ten-year strategic plan. To contribute toinstitutional goals, a scholarship program funded through the National Science Foundation wasdeveloped, which aims to significantly
: 1. What did you know about STEM (in general, engineering in particular) research or advocacy before participating in the PROMISE AGEP? 2. Do you do any work, formal or informal with STEM research or advocacy? 3. How has the PROMISE AGEP influenced your participation in STEM research or advocacy? 4. Are you working in an area of STEM research of advocacy now? 5. Do you have any plans to do any work in STEM research or advocacy in the future?Representative informants were chosen by using homogeneous sampling, which is a purposivesampling technique,14 which according to Welman and Kruger10 is the most important kind ofnon-probability sampling. The selection of the representative informants being
with program planning, management, and evaluation and an academic interest in leadership de- velopment in academic contexts. She holds a M.A. in Education from Michigan State University and an M.A. in English from The Ohio State University. Page 26.1785.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2015 “Leaning In” by Leaving the Lab: Building Graduate Community through Facilitated Book DiscussionsAbstractThis paper describes the design, implementation and evaluation of a facilitated discussion seriesdesigned to build community among graduate students in STEM
students weresatisfied with course contents, in general, and in particular, with weekly article review, thecourse relevancy to directed MS project. For the assignments and exam, however, theevaluations were a mix of high and low. Table 2 shows the results of students’ survey taken infall of 2012 and 2014.A quick review of a few other textbooks such as [6] and [7] indicated that the majority of thesetextbooks are for social science majors, too, though one may find a few technical examples. Forfuture, the author is planning to rely less on the textbook that he is currently using [5] andinstead, bring in more technical-oriented case studies in which students use scientific researchmethodologies to address the issue(s) presented (he is still in search
have.This paper is a work in progress; we attempt to identify the relevant engineering education PhDprograms in the country and compare them to understand if there is a consensus on how the fieldis perceived. This initial work will build up into a bigger plan of constructing a full evaluation ofPhD’s programs in ENGE and to measure the impact that the field has had in the engineeringdiscipline. More specifically, in this paper we will answer the following research questions: 1. Do all the PhD programs in engineering education have the same purpose? 2. Are there similitudes between the programs learning outcomes? 3. Are there similitudes between the milestones required to promote the learning outcomes
research experiences can impact a student’sexcitement, curiosity, and identity11. This project in particular was structured so that graduatestudents were exposed to a distributed research project that presented various methodologicalconsiderations. The project was organized and scaffolded in a way that would introduce newresearchers to engineering education research that would make them comfortable in the field12.The following potential results of participation were marketed to graduate students in an email: Belonging. Increase your sense of belonging to the engineering education community; Personal reflection. Engage in reflection on your own trajectories, plans, and expectations; Curiosity. Become increasingly curious
, ormathematics (STEM) 6. And less than 40 percent of students pursuing undergraduate degrees inSTEM majors completed their program6. The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES)Digest of Education Statistics (2001) reported that of the four million ninth graders in the US,less than half graduated from high school7. And of those high school graduates, one third had nocollege plans and 56 percent of them were not ready for college7. As Figure 1 illustrates, thestudy found that the STEM pipeline leaked 96 percent of potential STEM graduates.Figure 1: Illustration of the leaky STEM pipeline. Data is from the NCES Digest of EducationStatistics & Science Engineering Indicators, 20087.Effective personalized learning may have the potential to greatly
data were shared with fellow researchers and colleagues as a meansto ensure trustworthiness.ResultsOf the 42 posdocs in this study, 69% were in their first postdoc position, 29% were in theirsecond, and 2% were in their third. Of these 42, 48% were interested in academic positions aftertheir current position, while 29% were interested in industry. The remaining postdocs eitherwere uncertain of their plans or had plans unrelated to industry or academia. The followingsections summarize the reasons these postdocs decided to pursue postdoc positions, and theresponsibilities, benefits, and challenges that came with the position. The participants’ genderand field are represented by M (male), F (female), SCI (science), and ENG (engineering).Reasons
acting versus Balancing reflecting and experiencing versus thinkingFigure 2: The Nine Basic Learning Styles9These nine types of learning styles are associated with four learning abilities: ConcreteExperience (CE), Active Experimentation (AE), Reflective Observation (RO), and AbstractConceptualization (AC). The learning abilities are defined in Figure 3. Learning Ability Definition Abstract Logically analyzing ideas, planning systematically, acting on an Conceptualization intellectual understanding of the situation Active Showing ability to get things done, taking risks, influencing Experimentation people and events through action
into two equally largesubsets to analyze the effect of year of graduation.Table 5 shows the comparison between the results of recent years and earlier years. In Table 5,column 2 shows the resulting RankDists obtained on the entire data set; column 3 shows theresulting RankDists obtained on the data set from 1949 to 1994; column 4 shows the resultingRankDists applied on the data set from 1995 to 2014.The RankDist values in column 4 are all smaller than those in column 3, indicating that recentyear data reflects the U.S. News ranking better than earlier year data. In the future, we plan toemploy a weight differential model based on the year of hiring to make the rankings moresensitive to recent year data.Figure 2 shows the ranking divergence of
various strategies employed to mitigate those costs. In a further analysis, the utilityseen by returners was analyzed inductively, and it was found that there were three types of utilityvalue: plans to pursue an academic career, the wish to advance in an existing career path, and thewish to re-direct an industry career path into a different area of industry.9 Page 26.859.3Ongoing research efforts are contrasting them with direct-pathway students, those who do nottake a break of any significant length between undergraduate and graduate study, and examiningthe ways in which the two groups are similar and different.10,11 However, these research