AC 2012-4541: LESSONS LEARNED ON PREPARATION, MOTIVATION,EXPECTATION, AND REFLECTION WHILE TEACHING AND MENTOR-ING AS A GRADUATE STUDENTKacie Caple D’Alessandro, Virginia Tech Kacie C. D’Alessandro is currently a Ph.D. candidate in the Structural Engineering and Materials Pro- gram of Civil Engineering at Virginia Tech (Blacksburg, Va.). She received both her B.S. and M.S. from Clemson University. Once completing the Ph.D. program at Virginia Tech, D’Alessandro plans to pursue a career in academia to teach and to continue research on concrete structures. She also plans to pursue opportunities with engineering education research and K-12 outreach programs
Perry’s theorywill be discussed and summarized based on a synthesis of current literatures. Justifications aboutthe methodology of applying Perry’s theory among the Chinese Engineering doctoral students inU.S. institutions will be presented.Conceptualization of Personal EpistemologyIn Kitchener’s discussion about cognitive processing and dealing with ill-structured problems, heproposed a three-level model including Cognition, Metacognition, and Epistemic Cognition7. Atthe first level, Cognition refers to an individual’s ability to read, memorize, compute, etc.Metacognition has to do with the monitoring of the first level processes; Epistemic Cognition isrelated with reflections on “the limits of knowledge”, “the certainty of knowledge”, and
theunknown. I use the term ‘unknown’ to describe my situation at the start of my graduate studies.I was driven to make the most of my experience, but I did not know what I was looking for orwhat my path would look like. I present this autoethnography as an account of my experience inthe cultural phenomenon of navigating the unknown: searching to make the most out of mygraduate experience in a field that was unfamiliar to me.I define this work as autoethnography because I use myself as the primary data source, recallingmy memories and using my documented personal reflections, to explore how the culturalphenomenon of navigating the unknown has shaped who I am. As Chang1 states,“autoethnography is not about focusing on self alone, but about searching
instructor stated that the reflective processabout the students’ own professional identity was one of the most essential tasks in theirprofessional development. It directly addresses the “tell me about yourself” or “why should I hireyou” type of questions. In this activity, the students take 3-5 minutes to reflect on three to five ormore points that they would like their audiences to remember about them after their interaction.The audiences can be interviewers, potential employers at a career fair, or professionals withwhom they network in venues like conferences. After the reflection, the students paired withanother student and shared their skills, then came together for a large group discussion. Studentsshared among the class skills or abilities
AC 2012-5183: EASING INTO ENGINEERING EDUCATION: AN ORIEN-TATION PROGRAM FOR GRADUATE STUDENTSStephanie Cutler, Virginia TechWalter Curtis Lee Jr., Virginia Tech Walter Lee is a Graduate Assistant and doctoral student in engineering education at Virginia Tech. His pri- mary research interests focus on diversity and student retention. He earned a B.S. in industrial engineering from Clemson University.Dr. Lisa D. McNair, Virginia Tech Lisa McNair is an Associate Professor in the Department of Engineering Education at Virginia Tech. Her research includes interdisciplinary collaboration, communication studies, identity theory, and reflective practice. Projects supported by the National Science Foundation include
broadening participation of underrepresented groups in engineering. Page 25.660.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2012 Future Engineering Professors’ Views of the Role of Motivation in Teaching and LearningAbstractAs part of a larger study, doctoral students were interviewed about their perspectives on teachingand learning engineering. Participants were enrolled in engineering schools across the U.S. andexpressed interest in becoming engineering professors. In their reflections, fifteen of theparticipants talked about the role of motivation in teaching and
37/12.1 306/437 8 8 12 Fall 2010 N/A 24 3.12/.59 36/8.8 130/138 16 22 13 Fall 2009 N/A 13 3.11/.51 36/10.3 16/13 11 12 14 Fall 2008 2 16 3.14/.38 39/8.0 27/40 10 7 15 Fall 2010 N/A 38 2.99/.47 33/7.4 93/278 23 26 16 Fall 2011 N/A 28 3.25/.52 38/11.2 N/A 14 22The mapping of recessionary periods to cohort programs is reflected below and depicted in thecolumn titled Applicable Recessionary Period. Recession #1; March 1, 2001 – Nov 1, 2001 Cohort #4 – began Fall 2001
Purpose of This Element 1 Setting the Context Introduces the theme of the module along with what students should be able to do by the end of the module; Encourages students to reflect upon their values and attitudes about the topic (e.g., the best traits of a good mentor) 2 Warm-Up An often light-hearted activity that gets students to think about a topic without
in the assignment resulted in self-reflection on their own teaching skills.The students learned that observing a peer teacher made them aware of teaching strategies andmethods that work or do not work and why; and how to constructively give and receivefeedback.GTIs are coached in both giving and receiving feedback from a peer, which includes discussionson the roles of the observer and the one being observed. Students are provided with a rubric(Appendix A) for this project with the deliverable being a paper that describes the experience.Using the rubric as a guide the paper requires a detailed description of each part of theassignment, the pre-observation meeting, the observation, the post-observation meeting and aformal letter providing
the presenters.Workshops are scheduled on a weekly basis for ten consecutive weeks during both the fall andspring academic semesters. During summer session, the same series of workshops is presented ina one-week intensive course. Paper flyers and email messages are sent to the 70 differentacademic units on campus inviting graduate students, faculty, and staff to attend. Individuals arefree to register for as few or as many of the workshops as they would like. Graduate studentswho participate in at least eight of the ten workshops have the opportunity to earn one-hourpass/no-pass credit by simultaneously enrolling in a course on college teaching. This courserequires students to write reflective essays related to their experiences in the
this paper, we provide an overviewof the workshop organization and expand on the findings from the workshop, presenting detailedexamples and recommendations across a wide range of disciplines, types of universities, andlevels of faculty experiences. Specific findings centered on the idea that expectations should bemade clear to students as early as possible. We conclude with the implications for the graduateengineering community and offer recommendations for faculty members interested in continuingthis discussion at their institution.BackgroundDespite ongoing research in higher education, the basic model of doctoral education hasremained unchanged for several decades1. How the training of doctoral students is conducted,however, reflects
reflect positively on their university. The conference would allow graduate students topractice presenting their research as well as gain exposure to other research conducted at theuniversity. The conference would also provide an atmosphere for socializing or networking withother students as well as faculty outside the confinement of the classroom or lab walls. Creatingan atmosphere of a social nature has been shown to increase collaboration and quality of work 3.Additionally, having a college wide conference could provide an opportunity to show newgraduate students the wide range of research being conducted. Typically new graduate studentsdo not have the knowledge of what research they are interested in1, by having a conference thestudents could
, nor is it to define thediscipline of technology. The intent is to understand and critically reflect on the meaning ofthese two concepts and draw associations between them in an evolving effort to define anddevelop the 21st Century Technologist. It is only through a comprehensive understanding ofthese related concepts that we can draw parallels and capitalize on existing bodies of knowledge.As discussed by Bertoline6, technology is a pervasive feature of our contemporary culture but itis more than that; it is a defining feature of the human condition. Page 25.217.3We know a great deal about technologies in an individual sense, but much less
asked to rate the extent that they were interested in various components of typical and non-typical Ph.D. degree programs. Results indicated that participants felt that doctoral programswould be prepared to do almost everything on the survey, including things not typically taught.In response to a question about challenges to pursuing a Ph.D., potential Ph.D. candidatesfrequently mentioned financial concerns, and often stated that they “did not want to teach”reflecting a lack of understanding that the doctoral degree is relevant to industrial jobs. Resultsfrom this study can be used to inform doctoral programs and enhance the recruitment efforts ofengineering doctoral students in the United States.1. BackgroundThe traditional expectation of
% changeMaster’s 656,784 865,000 32%Doctoral 67,716 106,100 57%First Professional 92,004 119,200 30%Overall, the long term projections for growth in graduate education are positive, and reflect agrowth in graduate enrollments through 2020.A Note on Gender Balance and Demographics in Graduate ProgramsWomen are expected to continue to dominate graduate enrollments overall. From 2009-2020,the gender gap is expected to widen, with women increasing to make up 59% of all post-secondary students (up from 57.1% currently).15Women dominated graduate enrollments in 2010, with men as 40% of all graduate students, andwomen earning the majority of doctoral degrees (for the second year in
better reflects theneeds of industry. In fact, it is well-recognized that modern engineering problems are difficult tosolve within the scope of a single discipline and require individuals and teams to possess adiverse skill set and the ability to effectively integrate those skills to solve a problem1,2.Engineers who can cross the boundaries of traditional disciplines and integrate existingknowledge and create new knowledge are increasingly being sought1.The importance of interdisciplinary collaboration is particularly relevant in graduate engineeringeducation where research experience is paramount to development and integration of knowledgeand skills. The need for interdisciplinary collaboration in engineering education and research isdriven by
years prior to summer 2006 are incomplete, so those data are not included inthis analysis.Applicant TrendsAs depicted in Figure 1, our state and national recruiting efforts implemented for summer 2009resulted in an increase in the total number of applications as well as the number of applicationsrepresenting non-Texas A&M institutions. These trends reflect the shift in recruitment effortsfocused on non-Texas A&M students. Our goal is not to decrease the pool of Texas A&Mapplicants, but to increase the pool of non-Texas A&M students. Figure 1 Applicant Institutional Representation. 160 140 Number of Applicants 120
academia, disciplinary paradigms, assessment,and balancing academic and personal life. GRAD 59000 is posted to the academic transcript butcannot be used to fulfill Plan of Study requirements.PFF aims to socialize doctoral students to the diversity of faculty roles and responsibilities alongwith the expectations of excellence in research, teaching, and service through a mentoring modelusing a conceptual framework which incorporates research, teaching, service, career planning,and career and life balance, to guide student exploration and reflection. Using Purdue as a model,students customize the framework with mentoring tips and strategies learned from the speakers.In addition to representing different roles and positions at Purdue, each speaker
other’s scholarly, professional and personal development through collaboration, encouragement, knowledge sharing, and critical and reflective analysis as we contribute to the engineering education discipline. Page 25.677.2About GEECSThe first meeting of what would become GEECS was held in early 2010 through the facilitationof two engineering education faculty members. The goal was to provide a space and opportunityfor collaboration among EER graduate students in both engineering education departments andthose who were dispersed among contributing disciplines. From 2010 to 2011, the organizationformalized, selected a name, and
conversation was recorded and fieldnotes were taken. Page 25.860.3The data analysis began by summarizing each survey. Member checking was performed on thesummaries in order to establish credibility and prevent misinterpretation of results 25. Thisprocess was accomplished by emailing the participants a summary of their survey, and askingthem to review the summary, and to respond if it did not correctly reflect their conversations.Two participants suggested minor changes to their summary, such as the number of yearsbetween completing their bachelor and doctoral degrees. Six participants replied to the emailstating that the summary correctly reflected
actionsinclude:Articulate a Broad Diversity Vision and Specific Criteria for Comparison withComparative and Aspiration Institutions:At the core of effective diversity management is the articulation of a meaningful vision ormission statement for diversity that reflects the institutional commitment to diversity andequity goals. The institutional units must also develop meaningful and consistent support forDiversity and Equity in words and actions through allocation of sufficient resources. Theleadership must appoint and designate high level institutional leadership personnel with tenuredfaculty appointments to unify the vision for change deep into the institutional culture withappropriate language and expectations that can be embraced and duplicated at multiple
Page 25.560.86. ClosingWe concluded the session by once again revisiting the training objectives. A final opportunitywas given to the trainees to ask any other questions that may not have been covered during thetraining. We also take this opportunity to inform the students any resources available on campusthat may be of value to them during their TAship. The facilitator who shared the “Golden TA”closed with reflections on how their own attitude had changed after they had finished their firstTA appointment at the University.6.1 SurveyAt the end of the two sessions, we administered a brief survey to gauge the overall effectivenessof the program. The survey consisted of eight five-point Likert-item2 questions and threefreeform questions. For
, J. L. (1991) “Factors Influencing the Decision to Return to Graduate School for Professional Students”.Research in Higher Education 32(6), 689–701.10 Crede, E. and Borrego, M. J. (2011) “Undergraduate Engineering Student Perceptions of Graduate School and theDecision to Enroll”, American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition, Vancouver,Canada11 Perna, L. W. (2004) “Understanding the Decision to Enroll in Graduate School: Sex and Racial/Ethnic GroupDifferences”, Journal of Higher Education, 75(5), 487-527.12 Anderson, M. S. and Swazey, J. P. (1998) “Reflections on the Graduate Student Experience: An Overview”. NewDirections for Higher Education, no. 101, 3-13.13 Fairweather, J. and Paulson, K. (1996
study focused solely on the nature of the GTAfeedback. Previous research focused on the GTA grading of students’ responses.10 Bylinking these three data sources, conclusions could be drawn concerning the degree towhich the GTA is responding appropriately to the student responses and supporting thegrade they are assigning. In addition, future research could look at the impact of GTAfeedback on students’ responses to the problem formulation questions in subsequentMEAs.AcknowledgementThis work was made possible by a grant from the National Science Foundation (DUE0717508). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressedin this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views ofthe National Science
specifically on theproblem or topic, their role in the research process, skills they developed, equipment or methodsthey employed, and the findings or implications of the research. Although few graduate schoolapplications require such detailed research statements, this assignment was designed to helpstudents reflect on their previous experiences and to clarify what they might pursue as a graduatestudent researcher. In addition, drafting one of the three required statements for the NSFapplication may encourage students to apply for that graduate fellowship program.Research ForumThe University’s Summer Undergraduate Research Forum (SURF) brings togetherundergraduate researchers from across campus in one central location where they have theopportunity to