Percentage of participants Coping strategy Coping strategy using strategy (N=55) using strategy (N=55) Music/art/performance/ Alcohol use 11% (n = 6) 4% (n = 2) movies (not at home) Caffeine use 5% (n = 3) Pet(s) 7% (n = 4) Eating to relax 35% (n = 19) Planning or scheduling 24% (n = 13) Errands/shopping 4% (n = 2) Reading 16% (n
generation of engineers who thrive in their careers.References[1] National Association of Colleges and Employers, 'Career Readiness Defined,' [Online]. Available: https://www.naceweb.org/career-readiness/competencies/career-readiness- defined. [Accessed: 01-Feb-2024].[2] T. S. Ritchie, D. L. Rossiter, H. B. Opris, I. E. Akpan, S. Oliphant, and M. McCartney, “How do STEM graduate students perceive science communication? Understanding science communication perceptions of future scientists,” PLOS ONE, vol. 17, no. 10, p. e0274840, Oct. 2022, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0274840.[3] B. Holmes, T. Waterbury, E. Baltrinic, and A. Davis, “Angst About Academic Writing: Graduate Students At The Brink,” CIER, vol
of astudent’s perceived inclusiveness within an academic unit, provides empirical evidence of theunwelcoming culture of engineering graduate education. According to Gardner et al. [3],engineering graduate students reported a relatively lower sense of belonging within theiracademic department compared to students in other disciplines. O’Meara et al.’s [4] research onSTEM students’ sense of belonging echoed this claim, highlighting that there are fewerfacilitators (e.g., a critical mass of women, micro affirmations) for creating an inclusiveenvironment in STEM graduate programs compared to those in non-STEM disciplines. Theseauthors collectively emphasized the need for investigating engineering graduate studentexperience and integration
zero as shown in Fig. 4 (a) and will increase eventually.The pendulum will keep moving forwards and pass the varticle projection of the CoP as shown inFig. 4 (b). This is a case where the counterclockwise force is not sufficient enough to prevent fromfalling for the given parameters. (a) (b)Fig. 3. Simulation results when the pendulum does not fall. (a) Position x vs velocity x˙ of the CoM. The dot is the initial conditionwhere x0 = 0.05 m and x˙ 0 = 0.1 m/s. The solid line is |xo + x˙ o | and the dashed dotted line is the movement of the CoM for q > 0.The square is the position of u = 0.25 m. (b) The trajectory of the CoM. The dashed vertical
current state of forensic engineering education.AcknowledgmentOne of the authors was funded by FIU University Graduate School Dissertation Year Fellowship,and this support is gratefully acknowledged. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, orrecommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarilyreflect the views of the FIU University Graduate School.References[1] W. DeWitt, L. Geddes, F. Johnson, and L. Reader, “A master of science curriculum in forensic engineering,” in 31st Annual Frontiers in Education Conference. Impact on Engineering and Science Education. Conference Proceedings (Cat. No. 01CH37193), 2001, pp. F2B-8. doi: 10.1109/fie.2001.963696.[2] R. J. Heywood, “Responding to
communities of engineering education research scholars,” in Proceedings of the 2006 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference, 2006.[3] L. Zheng and S. Wei, “Institutionalizing Engineering Education Research (EER) in China under the context of New Engineering Education: Departments, programs, and research agenda,” Int. J. Eng. Educ., vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 353–368, 2023.[4] K. Edström, A. Kolmos, L. Malmi, J. Bernhard, and P. Andersson, “A bottom-up strategy for establishment of EER in three Nordic countries-the role of networks,” Eur. J. Eng. Educ., vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 219–234, 2018.[5] E. Matemba et al., “Reflecting on a community of practice for engineering education research capacity in
Engineering Education PhD Program Quality [Work-in-Progress] Le Shorn S Benjamin PhD, Jerrod A Henderson PhD William A. Brookshire Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering University of Houston This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant # EEC-2127509 to the American Society for Engineering Education AbstractDoctor of Philosophy (PhD) degree programs occupy the apex of the academic hierarchy. This ismainly because graduates are required to extend the bounds of existing knowledge. In the recentdoctoral discipline of engineering education, students are
(OP): comments with this code reference program recruitment, enrollment, matriculation, or other overall curricular design • Projects & Assignments (PA): comments with this code reference projects and assignments students completed in a course and may include class activities, readings, tests, papers, etc. • Scholarship (S): comments with this code reference publications or presentations students have published or submitted for publication. • Research Experience (R): comments with this code reference research experiences in classes or with faculty (but not specific to publications or presentations) • Courses (CO): comments with this code reference specific courses taken, not assignments
untrained GTAs.Limitations of this study include the lack of pre-assessment data in Cohort 1. Ongoing collectionwith Cohort 2 will include a post evaluation to determine growth in their teaching and learning,to improve test-power. Further, Cohort 1 peers are acting as mentors to Cohort 2. Providinglearned experiences to their peers and additional help with their curriculum development.References[1] L. W. Anderson and D. R. Krathwohl, Eds., A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, andAssessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Complete ed. New York:Longman, 2001.[2] National Research Council (U.S.), S. R. Singer, N. Nielsen, and H. A. Schweingruber,Eds., Discipline-Based Education Research: Understanding and Improving
user of English3.1 Articulate effective linguistic choices to each otherThe C-BLI approach posits that for learners to internalize (i.e., they can use the newknowledge on their own) a scientific concept, it is important to have them verbalize in class.Through an instructor’s mediation, learners should explain communicatively theirunderstanding of the concept(s) they are learning to each other. In this spirit, the last tutoringsession was devoted to individual presentations of their understanding and reflection of thefour linguistic concepts and corpus techniques. It was found that every participant wascapable of applying the linguistic concepts to their own writing (see Table 4). While Vihaanand Shyla chose to apply all four linguistic
: Embodied Cognition and Discourse, B. Hampe (Ed), Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press, 2017, pp. 297 – 316.[11] A. Deignan, E. Semino, and S. Paul, “Metaphors of climate science in three genres:Research articles, educational texts, and secondary school student talk,” Applied Linguistics, vol.40, issue 2, pp. 379 – 401, 2019.[12] G.J. Steen, Visual metaphor: Structure and process. Amsterdam: Johns BenjaminsPublishing Company, 2018.[13] E. El Refaie, Visual metaphor and embodiment in graphic illness narratives. New York,NY: Oxford University Press, 2019.[14] C. Reeves, The Language of Science. New York, NY: Routledge, 2005.[15] A. S. Reynolds, Understanding Metaphors in the Life Sciences. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press, 2022.[16] M. Bradie
2014 report indicate thatneurodiverse individuals make up only around 3% of science and engineering doctoral degreerecipients [10].Graduate students face a unique set of challenges when compared to undergraduate students,with faculty advisors playing a large role in student success. Several studies have noted specificchallenges related to advisors, including work-life balance, which may be impacted by facultyexpectations, and hierarchical faculty-student relationships [11]-[13]. Satterfield et al.’s [14]literature review focused on the experiences of graduate students during their studies andexplored how individual factors (the influence of the student’s advisor), programmatic factors(isolation and teaching assistantships), and external
(3), 285–301. Cabrera, A. F., & La Nasa, S. M. (2000). Mentoring minority students in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics: A review of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 70(3), 441–476. Campbell, Toni A., and David E. Campbell. "Faculty/student mentor program: Effects on academic performance and retention." Research in higher education 38 (1997): 727-742. Chen, X., & Soldner, M. (2013). STEM attrition: College students’ paths into and out of STEM fields (NCES 2014-001). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. Chen, X., & Weko, T. (2009). Students who study science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) in postsecondary education (NCES 2009-161
2.0for the upcoming semester(s)? for the upcoming semester(s)?Do you feel GVSU has adequate infrastructure to Do you feel GVSU has adequate infrastructure to 2.2 4.0support minority students? support you as a student?Did you get sufficient personal guidance/counseling Did you get sufficient personal guidance/counselingin socially adjusting to GVSU? 2.0 in socially adjusting to graduate school? 3.5Do you feel like people at GVSU treated you fairly Do you feel like people at GVSU treated you fairly
. References[1] P. Chakraborty, P. Mittal, M.S. Gupta, S. Yadav, & A. Arora, "Opinion of students on onlineeducation during the Covid‐19 pandemic". Human behavior and emerging technologies 3(3),2020, 357-365.[2] S. Oncu & C. Hasan, “Research in online learning environments: Priorities andmethodologies”. Computers & Education 57(1), 2011, 1098-1108.[3] E. Gross & D. Peters, “Comparison of Returning and Direct Pathway Graduate EngineeringStudents”. Journal of Continuing Higher Education 69(3), 2021, 145-168.[4] Tulane University. "Evolution of Distance Learning." School of Professional AdvancementBlog, https://sopa.tulane.edu/blog/evolution-distance-learning#:~:text=In%20fact%2C%20it%20was%20in,correspondence%20learning%20really%20took
one another and 14 initialcategories were identified. The categories capture the following meanings of NM1’s learningexperiences: (1) Obstacles and limitations; (2) Motivations; (3) Misconceptions about Ph.D.program; (4) Foundations and Focus; (5) Success/Survival; (6) Program comments; (7) Peer-to-peer learning; (8) Self-directed learning; (9) Mentoring & skill-building; (10) Social mentoring;(11) Goals as a mentor; (12) Mentoring as coaching; (13) Independence; (14) Why-questions. Asimilar coding process yielded 28 meaning units in the interview with a former AP lab mentor,PDM1. The following initial categories reflect PDM’s understanding of their role as a mentor:(1) Students’ independence; (2) Students’ peer-to-peer learning; (3
. Garrison, T. Anderson and W. Archer, “Critical thinking, cognitive presence, andcomputer conferencing in distance education,” American Journal of Distance Education, vol. 15,no. 1, pp. 7-23, 2001, doi: 10.1080/08923640109527071.[3] D. R. Garrison, “Shared metacognition in a community of inquiry,” Online Learning, vol. 26,no. 1, pp. 6-18, 2022, doi: 10.24059/olj.v26i1.3023.[4] A. A. Koehler, Z. Cheng, H. Fiock, H. Wang, S. Janakiraman, and K. Chartier, “Examiningstudents' use of online case-based discussions to support problem solving: Consideringindividual and collaborative experiences,” Computers & Education, vol. 179, no. 104407, 2022,doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104407.[5] J. P. How, “New STEM and Engineering Education Paradigms [From the
Recitation sessions – Methodology November 5 Methodology Due 100 December 1, 2023 Mid-Term Project Reflection 25 December 1, 2023 TOTAL 500 TABLE 3 SPRING – CAPSTONE II Point Description Due Date s Recitation Session - Data Analysis / Solutions / December, January ROI
," International Journal of Management andHumanities, 3(6), 1-5, 2018.[2] V. B. Onk, and M. Joseph, “International student recruitment techniques: A preliminaryanalysis,” Journal of Academic Administration in Higher Education, 13(1), 25-34, 2017.[3] T. Adams, M. Leventhal, and S. Connelly, “International student recruitment in Australia andthe United States”. The SAGE Handbook of International Higher Education, 399-416, 2012.[4] A. Robinson-Pant, and A. Magyar, “The recruitment agent in internationalized highereducation: Commercial broker and cultural mediator,” Journal of Studies in InternationalEducation, 22(3), 225-241, 2018.[5] S. Lomer, “Recruiting International Students in Higher Education Representations andRationales in British Policy London
Engineering and Computing (SPECTRA) program is an NSFScholarship in STEM (S-STEM)(Award # 1834081) based out of Clemson University in SouthCarolina. The SPECTRA program focuses on aiding transfer students interested in anEngineering or Computing degree by offering scholarships, opportunity to form cohorts, andaccess to professional skill-building programs. The goals of SPECTRA are as follows: (1) to provide scholarship opportunities to low-income students who wish to pursue engineering or computing at Clemson (2) to build cohorts of transfer students to support their transition into Clemson while also allowing for the Advisors for Cohorted Engineers (ACE) Fellows program to aid in the
. 2217640 through a wider initiative and acenter for transforming graduate engineering education. Any opinions, findings, and conclusionsor recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarilyreflect the views of the National Science Foundation.REFERENCESArtiles, M. S., Knight, D. B., & Matusovich, H. M. (2023). Doctoral advisor selection processes in science, math, and engineering programs in the United States. International Journal of STEM Education, 10(1), 1-16.Boyce, A. S. (2021). Strategies for mentoring and advising evaluation graduate students of color. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 35(3), 350-362.Bryson, T., Kowalske, M., Wilkins-Yel, K., & Housh, K. (2023). The
September of 2010, she served as the Outreach Program Coordinator for the Women in Engineering & Science Program at Kansas State University from 2000-2010. She began her work in STEM outreach and student support at Girls to Women, a private not for profit in Kansas City, in the late 90’s. She has also served on the board for WEPAN from 2012-2014. She earned her M.S. in Youth Development from the University of Nebraska and her B.S. in Family Studies at Kansas State University.Dr. Dayna L. Mart´ınez, Society of Hispanic Professional Engineers, Inc. Dr. Dayna L. Mart´ınez currently serves as a Director of Research & Innovation at SHPE. In this role, she oversees the Equipando Padres program, pre-college programming
complexity of thestakeholders, the evolving and interactive norms, and resources involved. These complexsystems can include local, state, and federal interdependencies and/or global interdependenciesthat require examination from a systemic and governance approach. These are common in areasof public planning, international affairs, and policymaking relying heavily on modeling thatemploys innovative methods for actual implementation. Figure 1. Engineering Systems, Bilen, S.,2020With the increasing rate of technological innovation and convergence among technologies andsystems—such as Industry 4.0; energy and communication systems; the digitalization of industrythrough automation, machine learning, and artificial intelligence
.1742-1241.2011.02659.x.[8] S. M. Van Anders, “Why the academic pipeline leaks: Fewer men than women perceive barriers to becoming professors,” Sex Roles, vol. 51, no. 9–10, pp. 511–521, Nov. 2004, doi: 10.1007/S11199-004-5461-9/METRICS.[9] R. Ysseldyk et al., “A leak in the academic pipeline: Identity and health among postdoctoral women,” Front. Psychol., vol. 10, no. JUN, p. 1297, Jun. 2019, doi: 10.3389/FPSYG.2019.01297/BIBTEX.[10] N. D. Jackson, K. I. Tyler, Y. Li, W. T. Chen, C. Liu, and R. Bhargava, “Keeping current: An update on the structure and evaluation of a program for graduate women interested in engineering Academia,” in ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings
interviews with each participant is provided below.Participant 1 (P1): P1, a fifth-year architectural engineering graduate student, initially intendedto pursue a master's degree and enter industry but decided to stay for a Ph.D. due to his passionfor research. He learned about the seminar through his wife and enrolled to gain valuableknowledge and feedback without dedicating excessive time. P1's expectations included learningabout the interview process, preparing application materials, and exploring non-academicopportunities. The seminar broadened his understanding of career options, provided insights intocrafting application documents, and facilitated peer review. He believes the seminar surpassedhis expectations to some extent, although he
feedback loop isanticipated to where as students progress in their respective research, the STEM Ed seminarcourse will provide a venue for them to continually give back to the program by allowing themto provide insights to new students.References [1] R. Sowell, T. Zhang, N. Bell, and K. Redd, Council of Graduate Schools, Washington, DC, rep., 2008 [2] Proceedings of the National Conference on Graduate Student Leadership (St. Louis, MO.: Washington University), 2003, 44-47. [3] Nettles, Michael T., and Catherine M. Millett. Three Magic Letters: getting to the Ph.D. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 2006. [4] A. Fentiman and S. Fisher, “Building Graduate Student Communities,” 2009 Annual
: developing entrepreneurialthinking in STEM (Entre-STEM)." Enhancing Entrepreneurial Mindsets ThroughSTEM Education. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 165-194, 2023[11] T. Siller, T., & G. Johnson, G. Curriculum, Pedagogy, And Assessment In EngineeringEducation Reform. In 2004 Annual Conference (pp. 9-366), 2004 (June).[12] I. K. Amalina, S. Suherman, T. Vidákovich, L. Puspita, & N. Supriadi. The Comparison ofHungarian and Indonesian Curriculum: A Case Study of ISCED 2 Mathematics and ScienceCurriculum. Journal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 12(1), 112-122, 2023.[13] Y. Supriani, F. Meliani, A. Supriyadi, S. Supiana, & Q.Y. Zaqiah. The Process ofCurriculum Innovation: Dimensions, Models, Stages, and Affecting Factors. Nazhruna
workforce and researchers who will generate scientificand technological knowledge for addressing society’s grand challenges. The current model ofSTEM PhD was designed at the end of World War II (WWII), when a report by Vannevar Bush[1] set the direction of federally funded scientific research in the USA. It considered curiosity-driven basic research as the starting point from which technological applications emerged throughbasic research → applied research → development → production → marketplace. This model ofresearch as well as doctoral training appeared to work well when there was steady growth of basicresearch at private companies until the early 1990’s, the golden era of (corporate) research [2,3 ].Then the US industrial research enterprise
defined by a sponsor or identified by the investigatorsthemselves. Overall, 37% of the participants belonged to the CD category, and 63% to the UIcategory.Participants presented a range of experiences in training doctoral students (see Fig. 1), rangingfrom 2 years to over 40 years. A majority of them fell within the category of 10-20 years ofmentoring experience (53%), followed by 35% with less than 10 years of experience.Additionally, 12% of participants possessed over 20 years of experience. This diversedistribution depicts a long-established doctoral training environment in the institution.4.2. Primary role(s) and responsibility of the faculty membersParticipants were asked to identify their primary role(s) in the doctoral training of students