teams as part of his thesis work, and had the opportunity to teach undergraduate ME courses. His previous efforts and experiences in engineering education helped shape his overall goal of fostering human-centered education systems, which led him to pursue his PhD at ASU.Dr. Mayra S. Artiles, Arizona State University Mayra S. Artiles is an assistant professor in engineering at the Polytechnic School of the Ira A. Fulton Schools of Engineering at Arizona State University. Her research expertise includes engineering doctoral education structure, experiences of underreprDr. Samantha Ruth Brunhaver, Arizona State University Samantha Brunhaver, Ph.D., is an Assistant Professor within The Polytechnic School of the Ira A
practices affected student motivation.Dr. Racheida S. Lewis, University of Georgia Dr. Racheida S. Lewis, Ph.D. is an Assistant Professor at the University of Georgia in the Engineering Education Transformations Institute (EETI) and the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2023 Faculty Perception of the GRE as a Graduate Admission RequirementIntroductionThe goal of this paper is to describe a study that assesses engineering faculty perceptions of theGraduate Record Examination (GRE) in terms of its usefulness as an application component foradmission into engineering M.S. Thesis and Doctoral programs
Paper ID #48082Adapting to Alternative Learning: Insights from Engineering Graduate StudentsDuring the COVID-19 PandemicAnimesh Paul, University of Georgia Animesh (he/they) was born in Tripura, India, and raised in a liberal, military family. A creative and outgoing individual, he earned a B.Tech in Electronics and Electrical Engineering from KIIT University. He is currently a Ph.D. candidate at the Engineering Education Transformation Institute, advised by Dr. Racheida Lewis, with research focusing on user experience and student transitions in engineering education.Dr. Racheida S Lewis, University of Georgia
Paper ID #37478Facilitating Engineering Faculty Success: Faculty Development ofGraduate Mentoring PracticesHimani Sharma, Arizona State UniversityMiss Amanda Marie Singer, The Ohio State University Amanda Singer is a second-year Ph.D. student in the Department of Engineering Education at The Ohio State University. She graduated in 2021 from Michigan Tech with a Bachelor’s and Master’s of Science in Environmental Engineering. Her current research interests include engineering identity formation, community college engineering education, and mixed methods research.Dr. Mayra S. Artiles, Arizona State University Mayra S. Artiles
bachelor’s degrees may be eager to enter the engineering workforce. However,in many engineering disciplines, individuals have more earning potential and career trajectoryoptions with a master’s degree. In this paper, we identify several categories of barriers and lessonslearned to launching an S-STEM focused on graduate students at a large R1 public institution thatmay be useful to other such programs. These include discussions on recruitment of this specializedpopulation of students into graduate school, especially those from other institutions, can bedifficult because i) there are structural and legal barriers to accessing financial information aboutstudents to identify low-income students and ii) smaller institutions may not have the
topic. It is not enough to do a basicliterature review; we want to be sure that we are broadly and systematically reviewing what isavailable with regard to graduate students in mentoring triads.Systematic literature review. As defined by Borrego and colleagues’ 2014 study on the subject,a systematic literature review follows a set of procedures in order to be reproducible [12]. Theseprocedures are Decision, Identification of Scope and Research Questions, Inclusion Criteria,Finding Sources, Critique of Sources, Synthesis, Limitations/Concerns, and further writing thereview itself. The Decision stage is the first step, in which the researcher(s) must agree to beconsistent and effective “between goals, research questions, selection criteria, and
have been calls to develop and deploy graduate STEM education modelsthat prepare students for careers outside academia. Few innovations have emerged to meet students attheir current skill and preparation levels when entering their graduate studies while also consideringstudents' individual desired career paths. The U.S.'s current approach to graduate STEM education doesnot emphasize preparing students with professional skills and experience outside the lab. Further,students from differing socioeconomic and underserved backgrounds are often not adequatelysupported. Through a National Science Foundation Innovations in Graduate Education (IGE) award, theUniversity of Pittsburgh Swanson School of Engineering is creating and validating a
. Theexosystem follows, encapsulating indirect environments (e.g., experiences of roommate ingraduate school but in a different degree program and conversations with the individual aboutthese experiences). The macrosystem level includes social and cultural values, whereas the finalchronosystem level pertains to transitions in environment(s) over time, respectively [21]. It isimportant to note that there is a bidirectional relationship between a person and theirenvironment; that is, they both can impact one another (discussed via the process-person-context-time [PPCT] language) [5].Godfrey & Parker’s Culture of Engineering Education Framework (CEEF)CEEF was used to provide context to the environment and systems engineering graduatestudents
of some complexity, and case participants need todiscuss and come to some solution(s) or plan(s) for the case. Shapiro’s book [9] lists the basicprocess as: 1. Case learners prepare for the case by reading and analyzing it 2. Optionally - students can perform a deeper preparation by having a priori small group discussions 3. An in-class discussion is done for the case 4. An end-of-class summary is provided by the facilitatorAs there are many books on the case method, our approach uses ideas from Rosenthal andBrown’s book for examples of pedagogically strong cases [10], and Barnes, Christensen, andHansen’s book [11] on how to teach cases (readers should note that this book is not only good forlearning about the case method, but
to cope with stress.References[1] K. Levecque, F. Anseel, A. de Beuckelaer, J. van der Heyden, and L. Gisle, "Work organization and mental health problems in PhD students," Research Policy, vol. 46, no. 4, pp. 868– 879, 2017.[2] T. M. Evans, L. Bira, J. B. Gastelum, L. T. Weiss, and N. L. Vanderford, "Evidence for a mental health crisis in graduate education," Nature Biotechnology, vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 282– 284, 2018.[3] M. Schmidt and E. Hansson, “Doctoral students’ well-being: a literature review,” International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-being, vol. 13, no. 1, 2018.[4] J. Hyun, B. Quinn, T. Madon, and S. Lustig, "Mental health need, awareness, and use of
indicated "strong agreement" or "always or almost always true of me." The first twosections were adopted from [5]’s survey, while the other survey sections were adopted from[20]'s survey. These scales allowed respondents to share distinct perceptions and experiencesrelated to the development of their pedagogical and entrepreneurial mindsets attributed to thecourse.Analysis ProcedureIn this study, the analysis focuses on evaluating the KEEN Entrepreneurial Mindset trackcompared to the general pedagogical and leadership development from the GTA course. Thesurvey was utilized, with each section corresponding to crucial topics within the course andKEEN tracks. The two surveys used in this study are valid and reliable [5], [20]. The impact ofthe KEEN
Created the GRE Exam,” Student Progress. Accessed: Mar. 30, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.studentprogress.org/gre/history/[2] “Wisconsin State Journal from Madison, Wisconsin,” Newspapers.com. Accessed: Mar. 30, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.newspapers.com/newspage/397344363/[3] “How Does the Old GRE Compare to the Current GRE?,” ThoughtCo. Accessed: Mar. 30, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.thoughtco.com/old-gre-exam-v-gre-general-test-3211977[4] S. E. Woo, J. LeBreton, M. Keith, and L. Tay, “Bias, Fairness, and Validity in Graduate Admissions: A Psychometric Perspective,” PsyArXiv, preprint, Aug. 2020. doi: 10.31234/osf.io/w5d7r.[5] M. C. Yu and N. R. Kuncel, “The Importance of
for this [13], [14]. Lemelinet al. discuss how community building can lead to increased student resilience, which can in turnreduce student resistance to active learning [15]. Zumbrunn et al. found that when studentsperceived the classroom environment to be supportive, their in-class engagement increased [16].Moreira et al. demonstrated that community building in the form of events, retreats, and onlinediscussions contributed to the retention and positive career outcomes for students from groupshistorically minoritized in STEM [17]. Active learning can itself contribute to students’ sense ofcommunity, as evidenced by Parrish et al.’s 2021 study which found that team-based learningfurthered students’ sense of community in both online and face
. Alexandria, VA: National Science Foundation. Available at https://ncses.nsf.gov/wmpd.[2] American Society for Engineering Education. (2024). Profiles of Engineering and Engineering Technology,2023. Washington, DC. https://ira.asee.org/profiles-of- engineering-engineering-technology/[3] Yoon, S. Y., Aldridge, J. L., Else-Quest, N. M., & Roy, J. (2024). Development of a climate survey for engineering doctoral students from an intersectional approach: First-round validity evidence. Proceedings of the 131st American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) Annual Conference and Exposition, Portland, OR, USA.[4] Aldridge, J. L., Else-Quest, N. M., & Yoon, S. Y. (2025, April). Applying an integrative climate framework to
creativelyintegrating and building on methodologies from the NSF I-Corps Lean Launchpad program(s)and Stanford’s Life Design curricula, the bootcamp equips participants with tools and strategiesto actively design and navigate their career paths. This initiative places students at the center oftheir career exploration, fostering a sense of ownership, confidence, and adaptability that is oftenmissing from traditional graduate training.Participants consistently reported significant shifts in perspective. They emphasized newfoundawareness of the broader impact of their research, the value of collaborative engagement, and theimportance of exploratory learning in both academic and non-academic settings. The bootcampalso enabled the development of critical
; for example, Chen et. al. states that “[s]tudents from all backgrounds may find theexperience [of an unexpectedly poor academic performance] threatening to their competence, butstudents from minority groups must also contend with anxiety that this performance ‘confirms’negative academic stereotypes attributed to their group memberships”[10].Often, these biases and stereotypes reflect an automatic judgment without an awareness ofindividuals’ specific abilities or experiences [11] [12]. Thus, the format of assessment, rather thanthe rigor, quality, or intended learning can have undue effect on educational outcomes. Forexample, IGEN performed a case study on a top-ranked physics program which noticed its“passage rate [for a qualifying exam] had
Venkataraman, San Diego State University Satchi Venkataraman, Ph.D., is a Professor of Aerospace Engineering. He has served as Graduate Advisor for the Aerospace Engineering program (17 years) and as an Associate Director at the Computational Sciences Research Center at San Diego State University (11 years). His expertise is in computational mechanics and optimization applied to design of lightweight and durable composite aircraft structures. He has extensive experience in developing programs for student professional development and broadening participation (co-PI and PI on three NSF S-STEM grants). ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024Exploring Interdisciplinary Identity Formation in
11published research conference papers and scientific journals, and securing one patent,highlighting the importance of engaging with PM training in graduate education.One study conducted by Ravankar et al. [15] did include doctoral students, but this study did notfocus specifically on STEM students. They revealed the applicability and value of PM training,demonstrating that engagement in PM training aligns with graduate students’ career aspirationsand satisfaction across various fields [15]. Despite these studies, Arditi et al.’s [16] review ofcivil management and construction master's programs in the U.S., highlighted a notable gap inPM training within this field. Their survey of 21 world-leading universities indicated a lack ofPM education, which
School Admissions Duan, D., Rico, C. A., García-Bayona, L., Blanco, A. T., Agreda, Y. S., Villegas Rodríguez, G. J., Ceja, A., Martinez, V. G., Goldman, O. V., & Fernandez, R. W. Hispanic/Latinx STEM Majors Applying Monarrez, A.,; Frederick, 2024 to
thenhow they interact over time to create distinctive developmental trajectories.Case 1: Student 1 - The Growth Alignment PatternAs seen in Figure 4, Student 1's developmental trajectory exemplifies the Growth AlignmentPattern, characterized by coordinated growth across all three dimensions of self-perceivedprogress, desire, and perceived possibility and culminating in identification as aninterdisciplinary scholar. Their journey demonstrates how initial tentativeness aboutinterdisciplinary work can evolve into a confident interdisciplinary identity through sustainedengagement with interdisciplinary practices and communities. Figure 4: The Growth Alignment Pattern Developmental TrajectoryDesire TrajectoryStudent 1's desire to pursue
international students for diverse career paths help to make their academic journey morerewarding. To thrive, one must embrace these multifaceted transformative experiences with anopen mind, a willingness to learn, and resilience that will enrich the academic experience andprepare them for future success beyond the classroom. Finally, after creating a welcomingclassroom environment, if faculty members desire to enhance international students' experienceand their ability to thrive, there must be intentional relationship building to help the studentsbecome more comfortable asking for help when needed.LimitationsThis study utilized a limited sample size in a non-randomized survey; hence, the findings maynot be generalized.References 1. S. K. Gardner
informed by our literature review and included questions aboutparticipants’ advisor(s), perceptions of their advisors’ work-life balance, research group climate,and department climate [4]. This paper focuses on responses to two questions from the largerstudy’s interview protocol: 1) What advice does your PhD advisor give you about your suitability and preparation for your desired career path? 2) Are there some aspects of your plans you don’t feel like you can openly discuss with your PhD advisor?3.3 | Data analysis We completed two rounds of inductive coding using transcripts from the interviews [29].In the first round of coding, we identified the five major themes of participant-advisorrelationship, participant's
through listserv(s) and/or paper postings onbulletin boards with additional information: • Open to graduate students in STEM-related programs • Continue to develop your inclusive teaching skills to support all students in your classes • Attend 3 workshops in [session month/year] • Eligible to earn an Inclusive Teaching for STEM Graduate Students Mini-Course CertificationAll sessions are 90 minutes, including both content delivery (generally 50 minutes total) andsmall group breakout discussions (generally 40 minutes total, broken into 5-10 minute individualbreakout sessions). Please note that while the sessions are titled “classroom,” the instructionalmodality is defined broadly and teaching techniques and strategies for in
, New York: Guilford Pr., 1999, pp. 403–422.[3] R. Brooks, S. Brooks, and S. Goldstein, “The Power of Mindsets: Nurturing Engagement, Motivation, and Resilience in Students,” in Handbook of Research on Student Engagement, S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, and C. Wylie, Eds., Boston, MA: Springer US, 2012, pp. 541–562. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7_26.[4] C. Dweck, “Implicit Theories,” in Handbook of Theories of Social Psychology, Sage, 2011, pp. 43–61. Accessed: Sep. 14, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://www.torrossa.com/en/resources/an/4912667[5] A. K. Gupta and V. Govindarajan, “Cultivating a global mindset,” Acad. Manag. Perspect., vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 116–126, Feb. 2002, doi: 10.5465/ame.2002.6640211.[6] C. S. Dweck
advising dynamics of education while highlighting the critical rolesadvisors play in constructing the academic life and future of the international student [5]. Thishas caused a dramatic change in the composition of Ph.D. enrollments in the U.S.The importance of cultural understanding in advising international students cannot be overstated,and several studies have highlighted this fact. For instance, Vakkai et al.'s research has shownthat international students' cultural backgrounds and values cannot be ignored, and havingadvisors who are more attuned to these aspects can significantly impact an individual's academicsuccess [6]. Similarly, Liu et al.'s study highlights the need for increased attention and guidancetowards international students
Our research paper examines the role of climate (e.g., interactions with others) in the skilldevelopment of engineering and physical science doctoral students. Skill development ingraduate school often occurs related to students’ primary funding mechanism, in which theymight interact with a research group or teaching team. Advisors also play a pivotal role in theengineering doctoral student experience; however, less is known about how positive mentoringinfluences skill development for engineering doctoral students. We investigated the followingresearch questions: 1) How, if at all, do interactions with advisor(s), faculty, and peers predict skill development (associated with primary funding mechanism) for engineering and physical
international students. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 11(3), 359-378.[2]. Skinner, R. (2013). American engineering doctoral enrollments. International Higher Education, (72), 23-24.[3]. Ku, H. Y., Lahman, M. K., Yeh, H. T., & Cheng, Y. C. (2008). Into the academy: Preparing and mentoring international doctoral students. Educational technology research and development, 56, 365-377.[4]. Hart-Baldridge, E. (2020). Faculty advisor perspectives of academic advising. NACADA Journal, 40(1), 10-22.[5]. Knox, S., Schlosser, L. Z., Pruitt, N. T., & Hill, C. E. (2006). A qualitative examination of graduate advising relationships: The advisor perspective. The Counseling Psychologist, 34(4), 489-518.[6
determineif the results are based on the field of study or just this individual course. In addition, it would beinteresting to determine if the results are only based on semiconductor manufacturing topic or ifthey apply to other engineering areas.References:[1] S. Kurinec et al., "Microelectronic engineering education for emerging technologies," in 2010 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), 2010: IEEE, pp. T3J-1-T3J-6.[2] A. J. Muscat, E. L. Allen, E. D. Green, and L. S. Vanasupa, "Interdisciplinary teaching and learning in a semiconductor processing course," Journal of engineering Education, vol. 87, no. 4, pp. 413-421, 1998.[3] S. Suteerawattananon, D. Prasertsom, J. Benjanarasut, B. Janthong, W. Kaewnet, and C