Paper ID #36886Engineering Graduate Leadership Fellows – Mentored Projects to BuildCommunityMs. Sandy ChristliebDr. Katy Luchini-Colbry, Michigan State University Katy Luchini-Colbry is the Assistant Dean for Graduate Student Services at the College of Engineering at Michigan State University, where she completed degrees in political theory and computer science. A recipient of a NSF Graduate Research Fellowship, she earned Ph.D. and M.S.E. in computer science and engineering from the University of Michigan. She has published dozens of peer-reviewed works related to her interests in educational technology and enhancing
Paper ID #38419Evaluating the Implementation of Project Management Skills Trainingwithin STEM Graduate EducationDr. Ann M. Gansemer-Topf, Ann Gansemer-Topf is an Associate Professor and Director of Graduate Education in Higher Education and Student Affairs. She teaches courses in program evaluation and assessment, student affairs and higher education. Her research interests include examining the micro (student) and macro (organizational) factors contributing to student success, scholarship of teaching and learning, and assessment and evaluation.Prof. Shan Jiang, The Ohio State University Dr. Shan Jiang is an Assistant
Kavitha Chandra is the Associate Dean for Undergraduate Programs and Professor of Electrical and Com- puter Engineering in the Francis College of Engineering at the University of Massachusetts Lowell. She directs the Research, Academics and Mentoring Pathwa ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2023 Human Balance Models for Engineering Education: An Innovative Graduate Co-Creation Project Alana Smith∗ , Emi Aoki† , Mahsa Ghandi∗ , Jasmina Burek∗ , Charles Thompson† , Kavitha Chandra† ∗ Department of Mechanical & Industrial Engineering † Department of
research;and developing leadership, communication, and professional competencies. After two years ofdevelopment and implementation, we are also able to discuss lessons learned and strategies forscaling the model. We present findings from students in the program and a reflective interview ofthe project leadership team. In order to adopt this innovative education model, students, faculty,and universities need understanding of career pathways and opportunities beyond traditionalacademic pursuits.IntroductionWe formed the Pathways to Entrepreneurship (PAtENT) graduate education model to addressthe need to develop and train advanced engineering students in the art of entrepreneurship.Workforce estimates show that only 10% of doctoral graduates in STEM
interests and ac- tivities center on gaining a better understanding of the process-structure-property-performance relations of structural materials through advanced multiscale theoretical framework and integrated computational and experimental methods. To date, Dr. Liu has published nearly 250 peer reviewed publications, includ- ing more than 130 peer reviewed journal articles, and received 2 patents. He has been the PI and co-PI for over 40 research projects funded by NSF, DOD, DOE, NASA, FAA, Louisiana Board of Regents, and industry with a total amount over $15.5M. Dr. Liu has served on review panels for many NSF, DOD, NASA, and DOE programs. Dr. Liu received the Junior Faculty Researcher of the Year of the College of
insights generated from the initial implementation of a journeymapping methodology and this methodology’s ability to inform doctoral program design andassessment. This paper explores journey mapping as a UX method for researching and assessing doctoralengineering programs and offers preliminary findings from journey mapping data collection. Asresearch participants, doctoral engineering students create journey maps to identify programexperiences that range from highly positive to highly negative in their personal identitydevelopment as engineering researchers. Among the most frequent experiences identified asdevelopmental were courses, projects and assignments, and individual research; less frequent butnevertheless key experiences were
efforts and to improve the effectiveness of our activities.These institutions are assisting with our recruiting activities but also advising on our studentsupport and retention strategies. While these institutions are potential direct sources of Latinxand Indigenous students for the PFMPR BD program, they also engage with our project team toimprove our overall understanding of how to best serve students from these populations. Thesecollaborative relationships are vital to the well-being of students and success of the program. Wewant to ensure that the relationship is mutually beneficial.Strategy 3: Broad spectrum and digital recruitment activities. In addition to leveraging theinstitutional relationships described above, we will infuse LSAMP
engineering education, retention of underrepresented students, measurement, and assessment. She is currently an Assistant Research Professor and coordinates the Sustainable Bridges NSF IUSE project (Peter Butler, PI). Previously, she was the project coordinator the the Toys’n MORE NSF STEP project (Renata Engel, PI).Dr. Julio Urbina, Pennsylvania State University JULIO V. URBINA, Ph.D. is an Associate Professor in the School of Electrical Engineering and Com- puter Science at The Pennsylvania State University. His educational research interests include: effective teaching techniques for enhancing engineering educatiDr. Cynthia Howard-Reed, Pennsylvania State University Cindy Howard Reed is the Assistant Director for
, technology policy, and law through the eyes of policymakers.Students work on public-facing projects in interdisciplinary teams applying strategic technologypolicy, regulatory concepts, and systems thinking to realworld policy issues to assist relevantpolicymakers in their policy decision-making process.Through the application of engineering systems principles (Figure 1), the use of systems design,and an understanding of sociotechnical systems, students in the MELP program will acquire theknowledge necessary for the understanding of policy and law as a system and how law, policy,and technology converge. Students will also develop skills for the analysis of complex systemsproblems, characterized by multi-stakeholder engagements reflecting the
, TX, USA Author Note:This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundationunder Grant No 1902072.Authors are listed in the order of their contribution to the manuscript.Correspondence regarding this manuscript should be sent to Magdalena G.Grohman at magdalena.grohman@unt.edu.AbstractMultiple studies report the benefits of authentic research experiences in STEMeducation. While most of them focus either on course-based research projects oron undergraduate students’ experiences, few document authentic learningexperiences unfolding in real time among and between graduate students inresearch laboratories. Therefore, we situate our study in the context of authenticresearch experiences in
structured interviewdata collected through an extracurricular student project. We investigated three key aspects ofgraduate school, particularly experiences with 1) work-life-balance, 2) imposter syndrome, and3) burnout. To develop the survey and interview instruments, we developed a pool of memes andgraduate student oriented advice columns then used thematic analysis to identify 9 thematicquestions about the graduate student experience. For this work, the data set was abbreviated toconsider only the 3 most salient topics. We found that students generally disagreed with thenegative themes identified and that memes tended to exaggerate these features of graduatestudent experience. However, emergent themes of self-efficacy in our analysis demonstrated
wereoffered courses for which expertise was available. The first essential skills course was a 1-creditcourse, ‘Fundamentals of Intellectual Property’, taught by the director of Technology TransferOffice. The students found the information unlike in any other courses they had taken. They werefascinated and felt the course could be useful in the future, but some were not sure how to applythis knowledge in practice, especially during their PhD. It was already a cultural shift.Subsequently, three 1-credit courses (‘Facilitation and Teamwork for Projects’, ‘Decision Makingand Ethics on Projects’ and ‘Project Leadership’) were offered. These courses, which were partof the Project Management Concentration within Lehigh’s MBA curriculum, were never
Sciences at Kansas State University. Currently, he is working on several projects that examine co-evoRebecca Cors, University of Wisconsin - MadisonNathan P. HendricksDr. Stacy L. Hutchinson, Kansas State UniversityDr. Prathap Parameswaran, Kansas State University Prathap Parameswaran is currently an Associate Professor and the Fornelli Engineering professorship holder at the Civil Engineering department, Kansas State University. Parameswaran’s research interests pertain to all aspects of biological wastewater treatment and sustainable resource recovery from wastes using novel environmental biotechnology platforms. He is an international expert in the implementation and long term operation of Anaerobic Membrane Bioreactors
learning.1. IntroductionThe understanding of the true motivations and drivers for why a post-graduate student wishesto do a PhD and enroll onto a doctorate program at university is a valuable piece ofinformation. Those personal and individual motivations set the foundations of their doctoraljourney. This journey is far from straight forward and seamless. It can be a trying venture thatchanges the candidate forever. In our role as supervisors and PhD project directors, we oughtto support the student when hiccups occur. An effective way to support the student throughthis personal and professional journey is to utilize and re-call upon their motivations.However, these are often not well articulated or communicated by the candidate because theyare
consistently shapes their persistence and success is their advisingrelationship. The way students perceive the support they receive from this relationship caninfluence their self-efficacy concerning the competences needed to finish their dissertation, thesisor applied project report. Understanding the relationship between the student’s self-efficacytowards their culminating tasks and their perception of their advisor’s support is essential, asfrom a motivational standpoint, it can serve as a closer proxy for degree completion.This research paper presents the development and validation of the Advisor Support and Self-efficacy for Thesis completion (ASSET) survey, which measures two constructs: Thesis Self-efficacy and Advisor Support. The former
intentionally stratified sample ofdoctoral students four times during the course of an academic year. We present an overview ofour research process and the top 10 most reported stressors from analysis of our interview data.Further, we report on the most frequent coping strategies used by students in our sample,contributing additional coping strategies used by engineering doctoral students. Understandingthe most common factors which contribute to the stresses experienced by doctoral students andthese students effective coping strategies can support students, advisors, and departments todevelop proactive interventions and strategies that support well-being and retention.Research QuestionsThis project is part of a larger, mixed methods project with the
that semester-long courses (16 weeks) are the most effective preparationformats for preparing GTAs to teach in engineering; however, the content that constitutes such acourse and the impact of the course on the GTAs’ TPACK domains still require further exploration.The purpose of this study is to assess the impact of a semester-long preparation course on theTPACK domains of GTAs in Engineering.In Spring 2022, 165 GTAs took a semester-long teaching and leadership preparation course forengineering graduate students. The course was composed of fourteen 50-minute weekly sessions,seven bi-weekly written assignments, and one optional service learning project. Forty-sevenstudents participated in the study. They completed a validated and reliable pre
programquality in Eng Ed PhD programs originate from a different position. For example, researchers,Murzi, Shekhar, and Mc Nair cited the increasing number of Eng Ed PhD programs, as a keymotivator for their foundational scholarship on Eng Ed PhD program quality and as a reason foradditional research in this area [2]. Their work, as well as that of Lopez and Garcia [4] andBenson et al. [3], provides a strong basis for our study, having presented a document-based,comparative analysis of the formation, aims, requirements, and outcomes of existing Eng EdPhD programs. To expand the existing knowledge on the topic, we designed an overarchingInterpretative Phenomenological Analysis project to examine the conceptions of program qualitythat Eng Ed PhD program
and exit survey filled out by thestudent users of the Hub has been collected. The Hub’s activities also have included ancillaryactivities such as the Three Minute Thesis, (3MT).® competition, fall and spring Writing Retreats, and quiet writing time where students can showup and take a small private room to work in and make a plan for themselves.We acknowledge the need for more systematic study and evaluation of outcomes, but thus far,students who have visited the Hub are appreciative and rate the value of learning and help ontheir projects very high. Likewise, evaluations of the writing and oral communications coursesare highly rated with enrollment sustained primarily through word-of-mouth recommendations.Future work includes definition and
as a psychometrician, program evaluator, and data analyst, with research interests in spatial ability, creativity, engineering-integrated STEM education, and meta-analysis. As a psychometrician, she has revised, developed, and validated more than 10 instruments beneficial for STEM education practice and research. She has authored/co- authored more than 70 peer-reviewed journal articles and conference proceedings and served as a journal reviewer in engineering education, STEM education, and educational psychology. She has also served as a co-PI, an external evaluator, or an advisory board member on several NSF-funded projects. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2023
Paper ID #38583Attributes of Research Mindset for Early Career Engineering ResearchersMr. Sanjeev M Kavale, Arizona State University Sanjeev Kavale is currently a Ph.D. student in Engineering Education Systems and Design (EESD) at Arizona State University (ASU). His research interests are mindsets and their applicability in engineering, outcomes-based education, and problem / project-based learning. He is having a teaching experience of 11 years and an industry experience of 2 years prior to joining PhD.Dr. Adam R. Carberry, Arizona State University Dr. Adam Carberry is an associate professor at Arizona State University
Award in 2018, and was inducted into the Virginia Tech Academy of Faculty Leadership in 2020. Dr. Matusovich has been a PI/Co-PI on 19 funded research projects including the NSF CAREER Award, with her share of funding being nearly $3 million. She has co-authored 2 book chapters, 34 journal publications, and more than 80 conference papers. She is recognized for her research and teaching, including Dean’s Awards for Outstanding New Faculty, Outstanding Teacher Award, and a Faculty Fellow. Dr. Matusovich has served the Educational Research and Methods (ERM) division of ASEE in many capacities over the past 10+ years including serving as Chair from 2017-2019. Dr. Matusovich is currently the Editor-in-Chief of the
marginalized groups continue to pursue graduate education. In Golde’s work on socialization in graduate school, the first year of doctoral education isbroken into four tasks of transition. The first is intellectual mastery, in which a student completescoursework in their field. The second task is learning how graduate school operates and whatthey should expect from their life in graduate school as a student. Similarly, the third task isdescribed as learning how their projected profession works and determining how they feel aboutmoving in this direction post-graduation. Finally, the fourth task is integrating themselves intothe department and their cohort [1]. The program described in this work is designed to primarilyassist students with this
students themselves, that impact their interdisciplinary journey anddemotivate their interdisciplinary scholarship. For example, one of the main priorities graduatestudents discussed as in conflict to their interdisciplinary scholar identity development is theexpectation to have publications in certain disciplinary-acclaimed journals and to specifically bethe first author on those publications. In 2020, Student A said, So I was thinking about the IR program, and I think it is a little bit hard to be motivated, because PhD students need to be the first author of their dissertation. And everyone is PhD student so … their priority cannot be that interdisciplinary project. And I get also faculty have similar feeling, because
letters fromprofessors at their undergraduate university due to the groups’ differing proximity to theseindividuals. The third significantly different action was the “other” category. Approximately16.25% of returners marked “other” compared to approximately 2.75% of direct pathwaystudents. Project portfolios, letters of recommendation from sources not included in the questionoptions, and resumes were among the other strategies listed. The responses obtained from thisquestion are shown in both Table 9 and Figure 1.Table 9: Strategies to Gain Graduate Program Acceptance Returner Direct Pathway Number of Percent Number of Percent Dependent on
Engineering at the Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology (BUET). After graduating she worked for two years in a construction management company in Dhaka, Bangladesh. She was involved in various residential and infrastructure projects. Rubaya now is a Ph.D. student at Department of Civil and Environ- mental Engineering and Teaching/Research Assistant at Moss School of Construction, Sustainability and Infrastructure, Florida International University. Her research interest includes Sustainable and resilient infrastructure, Engineering Education, and Sustainable transportation system.Mr. Mohamed Elzomor P.E., Florida International University Dr. Mohamed ElZomor is an Assistant Professor at Florida International
continuing research project focused on engineering graduate student stressand coping mechanisms. The first part of this research project [27] investigated the interactionsbetween various stressors and coping mechanisms from a quantitative perspective. This workbuilds on the previous by utilizing responses to open-ended questions posed in the initial survey,constructed through Qualtrics, which gathered data regarding perceived stress levels, stressors,and coping mechanisms used by engineering graduate students. The survey was distributed to allengineering graduate students at a mid-sized Mid-Atlantic University.The survey collected basic demographic information (engineering discipline, degree program,age, race, ethnicity, gender identity, disability
Paper ID #38851Literature Exploration of Graduate Student Well-Being as Related toAdvisingDr. Liesl Klein, Villanova University Liesl Krause-Klein is a assistant teaching professor at Villanova University in their electrical and computer engineering department. She graduated from Purdue University’s Polytechnic institute in 2022. Her research focused on student well-being. She is currently in charge of curriculum for capstone projects within her department.Dr. Greg J. Strimel, Purdue University at West Lafayette (PPI) Greg J. Strimel, Ph.D., is an associate professor of Technology Leadership and Innovation and program
Paper ID #38901Student-led program to improve equity in Ph.D. oral qualifying examsMeredith Leigh Hooper, California Institute of Technology This author was an equal first author contributor to this work. Meredith Hooper is an Aeronautics PhD student studying under Professor Mory Gharib in the Graduate Aerospace Laboratories of the California Institute of Technology (GALCIT). Meredith is a National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellow, leader within the GALCIT Graduate Student Council, and Co-Director of the Caltech Project for Effective Teaching (CPET). Her PhD research uses a combination of machine learning and
they had withtheir primary advisor, many students did not know about existing resources on campus. Inaddition, no data had been collected about faculty perspectives on mentoring their graduatestudents. As a result, the fellows identified three projects to tackle during the 2022 calendar year:creating an engineering-specific individual development plan, surveying faculty members aboutmentorship, and educating students about healthy and toxic mentorship.Literature ReviewThe most influential factor on a graduate student’s doctoral experience is their primary researchadvisor [1] – [4], yet most institutions lack formal guidelines for the structure of this relationship.Identifying a mentor should be a major priority for graduate students early in