Paper ID #39783What If They Choose: Surfacing Insights Associated with a Pedagogy forDoctoral EducationDr. Jennifer A. Turns, University of Washington Dr. Jennifer Turns is a full professor in the Human Centered Design & Engineering Department in the College of Engineering at the University of Washington. Engineering education is her primary area of scholarship, and has been throughout her career. In her work, she currently focuses on the role of reflection in engineering student learning and the relationship of research and practice in engineering education. In recent years, she has been the co-director of the
encouraging students to develop their own agency through avariety of course assignments afforded students the opportunity to develop adaptive perspectivesand a sense of control as they navigated troublesome shifts in professional identity. We alsofound evidence that students felt the program provides a sense of community, autonomy overprofessional development, and opportunity for exploration and self-discovery. Finally, instudents’ final written reflections on the course, we found evidence of increased sense of controlover their unique career development path and growth of their mentor network.We discuss the relevance of these findings for theory on interdisciplinary identity developmentand design of professional development courses to increase
, as reasoning and emotion are ofteninterwoven. Newly enrolled doctoral candidates were asked to explain ‘why a PhD’ usingLEGO® pieces to help them express beyond words, with constructions, through similes andmetaphors. The use of LEGO® was intentional for two reasons: it gave them a visual andkinesthetic outlet for enhancing and deepening their reflections and message; and it put themat ease, in ‘play mode’, which allowed them to access aspects of their psyche not typicallyexploited in technical conversations. They constructed stories, created characters, andproduced metaphors to channel and express what their motivations, drives and purpose were.The most common types of metaphors used were visual, ontological and spatially related.Their
combinetheory and practice, and design to establish knowledge base in system thinking concepts andtools, and focus on the unique challenges for management, governance, communication, andpolicy in the FEW nexus. Course grading includes reflections and analyses, creating systemcomponent maps with Loopy (a free online tool for thinking in systems), and a final project, anintegrated system map. All assignments are individual assignments. The NRT external evaluatordesigned an annual NRT survey that assesses the NRT program at our university, including theimpacts of the NRT Integrated FEW Systems course. Student ratings about their perceivedability to perform interdisciplinary systems tasks improved from the beginning to the end of thecourse, from ‘somewhat
, engineering doctoral students werefound to be the most difficult to attract in terms of willingness to work with writing centers[16].Discipline-Specific Writing-Intensive CourseSituated within a complex sociocultural context, each discipline under engineering enjoys aspecialized epistemology and rhetorical convention that are co-constructed and practiced byits members [17]. As newcomers to the discipline, graduate students are waiting to beapprenticed into their respective domain, sometimes through a discipline-specific writingcourse. According to research in disciplinary writing education, analyzing discipline-specifictexts is an excellent starting point for writing instruction, allowing students to reflect ondisciplinary norms and incorporate these
professional developmentstreams, and a resolute approach to Scaffolding Instruction that leads to mastery in the student's area offocus. The last two components provide feedback and reflection: Assessment of Performance Learningquantifies students' progress, and Reflection and Evaluation, where improvement opportunities help thestudent to develop further. Incorporating personalization at every touchpoint of a graduate student'sacademic journey creates an authentic, customized, student-centered approach to graduate education.This paper describes the model, the literature behind its development, and the assessments used to guidestudents.IntroductionGraduate STEM training and career preparation has historically followed a "one size fits all" approach
-surveys that focused on thequestion, "What influence did the course have on students’ knowledge and application of PMskills?”Course OverviewThe GAPS course (MSE 580x), Introduction of Project Management for Thesis Research, aimsto improve graduate STEM students' efficiency in completing their thesis research and projectsby adapting the PM skills and concepts. This one-credit, satisfactory-fail semester-long course isoffered once a week for 50 - 80 minutes. Students learn PM processes such as Work Break DownStructure and Critical Path and tools like the Project Charter and Gantt Charts. Although thecourse's primary focus is PM skills, throughout the semester, students have the opportunity todevelop other skills such as communication, reflective
increase in heat-related death, damage to land, plants, andanimals, a rise in life-threatening infectious diseases “such as dengue, malaria, vibriosis, andWest Nile virus” [1], peril to water security, sanitation, and food production, harm to livelihoodsand economic loss. Preparing the next generation of Environmental Professionals to tacklethese and additional challenges is daunting. This paper shares some preliminary reflections onsix short workshops to humanize care, commitment, skill, and responsibility for the heavy liftinginvolved in facing the effects of climate change. The workshops introduce graduate students tothe concept and practice of transdisciplinarity, weaving together topics from interculturalcompetence, community-engaged practice
resources.In addition to fulfilling the course requirements for the STEM education Ph.D. curriculum, thisseries of meetings helps build community among the students and faculty members. It providesan opportunity to share insights and experiences while having faculty members present to helpguide processes and discussions. A goal is to create a strong foundation of collaboration that willtranscend the course and continue beyond its requirements. As students progress in theirrespective research, this course can provide a venue to continually give back to the program.This paper will provide a reflection on the experience of three STEM education Ph.D. studentswho participated in the redesigned seminar course. STEM education students who participated inthe
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
thecomplexity of the teaching responsibilities that is prescribed by the difficulty of disciplinarycontent, the role of technology in the content, and the objectives of the engineering programs thatnow include acquiring soft skills, such as collaboration and communication, in addition to theknowledge of the engineering content. Research studies have shown that semester-long courses(16 weeks) are the most effective formats for preparing GTAs to teach in engineering and computerscience [7]. Nevertheless, for these courses to be effective, they must offer GTAs opportunities tolearn, apply, and reflect on different teaching practices so they develop competencies associatedwith the TPACK domains. In this study, an existing semester-long teaching and
andprovide flexible learning opportunities [9,10]. These efforts reflect a broader recognition of theimportance of communication skills in graduate education and a commitment to preparingstudents for the multifaceted demands of their professional and academic futures.The University of Connecticut has taken a step to advance its graduate engineering curriculumby recognizing the significance of structured support in scientific communication and overallcareer preparation for graduate students. The university has launched a ProfessionalDevelopment (PD) course series uniquely tailored to boost the success of its graduate students.This program distinguishes itself through its focus on career advancement and developingessential core skills for graduate
effectively ona team, integrate information from multiple sources, communicate with written and visualmaterial, and make connections across disciplines 18 .PBL is not inherently transdisciplinary or convergent, but PBL can be used to teach and addressconvergent problems. While PBL is not the only way to learn convergence methodologies, it canbe an efficient “means” to the “end” which is understanding and implementing convergencemethodologies. It emphasizes the process of question identification and framing as much asproblem solving, encouraging students to iterate and seek feedback, and to reflect on theirapproach and proposed solution. Additionally, outcomes of PBL are similar to the skills neededfor the future of convergence research in industry
. students in engineering – from motivations and persistenceto encounters with racial microaggressions – the disparity remains, underscoring the need fordeeper exploration.Utilizing autoethnography, this study illuminates the journey of a Black female engineer fromNigeria during her inaugural semester in a U.S.-based civil engineering Ph.D. program. Theresearch hinges on two pivotal questions: what early challenges did she confront, and how did shetraverse them? To answer these questions, reflective journals and audio diaries maintainedconsistently by the researcher were employed. These data sources were subjected to inductivecoding via Dedoose to tease out dominant themes.This research findings highlight critical challenges this international
Success," to improve advisingpractices for chemical engineering faculty and provide guidance for the successful mentoring ofgraduate students. The workshops aim to elicit reflections and encourage discussions amongfaculty to identify their beliefs about mentoring, explore how they align their mentoring practiceswith their research agenda, and how they define success for their students. This paper describesthe development and implementation of the first workshop in the series “Facilitating EngineeringFaculty Advising Success: Effective Strategies for Mentoring Graduate Students,” which wasoffered during the Fall 2022 semester. Emergent themes from participant contributions duringthis workshop highlighted collective difficulties in navigating and
could alsocause stress when it came to interactions.Qualifying Exams. Theme: Milestones: Preparing for and completing the qualifying exam was amajor stressor for participants; students in later stages of their programs also reflected on theirstressful experiences with qualifying exams. Oral exams were generally described as moreacutely stressful compared with written exams. Preparing for the exam led to conflicts withresearch progress or course deadlines, while the risk of consequences of failure (such as beingremoved from the program) led to stress due to the high stakes nature of the exams. A fewparticipants failed initial attempts at their qualifying exams and described very high stress interms of repeating preparations for the exam
overarchingthemes identified across all responses include a struggle to keep track of responsibilities in manyareas (typically classes, research, and personal needs), transitioning from student life toadulthood or feeling “stuck” between student life and adulthood, problematic cultures of stress indepartments or in engineering as a field, and a need to dissociate/disconnect from academicresponsibilities in order to feel relaxed (referencing anything from time with friends to alcohol).These trends were additionally examined by stress level (low/moderate/high). Results indicatethat graduate students with low levels of stress tend to practice self-reflection and disconnectionfrom their academic responsibilities to relax, while students with higher stress
other subjective measures like letters of recommendation and interviewsfor the admission process as the GRE quantitative score only measures a student’s ability whichaccounts for a fraction of graduate school success determinants. Rockinson-Szapkiw, Bray Jr,and Spaulding [6] in their study on the GRE score predictive validity in doctoral education alsodiscovered the GRE writing score to be a strong predictor for graduate students’ dissertationcompletion time.While these studies focused on various components of the GRE, evaluating their validity inpredicting factors postulated to reflect graduate school success, a more recent study by Newmanet al. [7] assessed issues with the GRE considering fairness for all demographic of applicants.They
, enhanced teamwork and sustainedprofessional development.The professional identity of doctoral students is defined by their acknowledgment andrecognition of their major through rigorous study, research, and practical applicationof their academic disciplines. Furthermore, it reflects their eagerness to proactivelyadhere to professional and occupational norms, and to pursue this career as a personallifelong goal.[11,12] Identity in the field of engineering education also focuses on theoverall process of an individual's transformation from an "outsider" to a community inthe field of engineering, such as awareness and perception of the content ofspecialized knowledge in engineering, the significance of the profession, thecharacteristics of the
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
communities in the United StatesAbstractThis paper shares and compares the experiences of initiating and sustaining two graduatestudent-led international ethnic engineering education scholarly communities for Chinese andAfrican groups. Our goal is to reflect on our lived experiences and inspire future students andacademics to cultivate such communities to broaden participation and enhance researchcapability. We adopt the Community of Practice (CoP) as the theoretical framework and opt forcomparative ethnographic narrative analysis as the method in this paper. Specifically, we focusedon the following dimensions of two communities led by the two authors: (1) the origin andpurpose; (2) the characteristics; and (3) practices. Our findings suggest that
transform STEM education can be implementation of an inquiry-basedcollaborative approach. The inquiry-based collaborative approach can impact and prepare STEMgraduates for the future workforce following the required high level of critical thinking, problem-solving, and decision-making skills. This innovative approach also can help STEM graduatesdevelop required collaborative and communicative skills while working as part of any team.The inquiry-based collaborative approach has recently received recognition when themetacognitive approach has been implemented into the design of online, hybrid and face-to-facelearning to support the dynamics of reflective thinking and a collaborative inquiry process [2].Metacognition is a required cognitive ability to
courses,and a short description of these courses can be found on our university Graduate School website[9].For students’ professional development, the NRT offered a seminar series in the fall and springsemesters, which included eight sessions (twice a month) each semester. NRT Seminar is a 0-credit hour seminar that has been offered on a Credit/No Credit basis. Students completed up tofour semesters of NRT Seminar. The NRT Seminar consisted of training sessions related toinclusion, career pathways, campus resources, skill development to communicate acrossdisciplines and to diverse audiences, and exposure to FEW research initiatives. Internal orexternal guest speakers gave talks during seminar. Students completed a reflection activity aftereach
integrates culturally reflective mentoring and professional development specificallydesigned for Black, Latinx, and Indigenous Ph.D. students. This holistic graduate studentdevelopment model includes academic and professional skill-building for STEM careersalongside targeted support for pursuing fellowship opportunities, including the NSF GraduateResearch Fellowship.The theoretical framework for our model is based on social cognitive career theory (Lent et al.,1986). This is foundational to our program because it builds on the idea that the higher theperceived self-efficacy to fulfill educational requirements and occupational roles, the wider thecareer options people will seriously consider pursuing (Lent et al., 2004; Lent et al., 2010). Thegreater
reality under investigation, we, theresearchers, identified a telling consensus across their interviews. Participants illuminatedunrelenting reflections about their programs and “what does it mean” to offer one that is ofquality and how even answers to these questions may exist only “at that time” since they werelikely to change. Finally, there were other key quotes that found participants examining how theyused program goals and outcomes “to assess the[ir] program” and change them accordingly ifthey were not “working so well.” After three stages of (descriptive, linguistic, and conceptual)analysis, authors present a singular superordinate theme The Role of Assessment in Eng Ed PhDProgram Quality. Implications of this study are applicable to
and safe working conditions being ahot-button issue in graduate education for decades, nowhere in engineering education research isit discussed [15]. Should research in our field align itself more with the university than thepopulations being studied? How should we be studying doctoral engineering students? Whatproblems should we be highlighting?The Role of Doctoral Engineering StudentsTo decide what direction work in the field should take, we must first understand what roles andresponsibilities doctoral engineering students have at their universities.As existing literature and legislation reflect, the doctoral engineering student has long existed inan ambiguous space [15], [16]. Universities do not consistently classify them as either staff
voluntary convenience samplesurvey. Over 2,000 respondents from 26 countries and 234 institutions responded, revealing anoverwhelming mental health crisis in the graduate student population [9], [10]. They reportelevated rates of anxiety (41%) and depression (39%) in the sampled community, suggesting thatgraduate students are six times as likely to experience depression and anxiety compared to thegeneral public. Likewise, students have not been passive in their dissatisfaction with the state ofthe academy. In recent years, student labor organizing [11], labor strikes, and general protestmovements have become common reflecting the general themes of modern politics including themultiple epidemics of sexual harassment [12], [13], racism [14], [15
; 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
near-peer mentoring between graduate students and undergraduate transfer students in engineering and computingIntroduction Mentoring is a practice in which a student, or mentee, and a more experienced individual,a mentor, engage in a relationship that includes advising or instructing by the mentor to thementee. This type of relationship can be seen throughout academia and is commonly foundbetween staff members and students. The concept of near-peer mentoring reflects the ideas andgoals of traditional mentorship but is formed between individuals who are at similar experiencelevels, personally or professionally, where the mentor and mentee relate to one another due tosimilar age proximity, shared goals, common experiences, or
interactions with peers and faculty withinthe first 10 weeks (about 2 and a half months) of graduate school reduced the impact of stress,both physically and psychologically, for the next 6 months [7]. Overall, we know that at least40% of all doctoral students do not complete their programs, and much of this attrition could beprevented and is not reflective of student capability [8].Simultaneously, doctoral degrees awarded in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics(STEM) continue to be disproportionately awarded to white students. In the 2019-20 academicyear, 71.3% of all STEM doctoral degrees awarded to U.S. citizens and permanent residentswere awarded to white students, even though the U.S. population is approximately 59.3% white.Only 4.3