describe our approach of scaffolding the process of student revision of writtenassignments with grading rubrics, peer review, and reflection. This work-in-progress is the firsttime we have graded rough drafts according to a rubric, although we have extensive experiencein using peer review and reflection to scaffold better writing outcomes for students [1-4].Here we describe our approach to scaffolding the student revision process in three steps: 1) Grade based on grading rubric for rough drafts. We provide grading rubrics for rough drafts when the assignment is posted, and then give students a grade on their rough draft. Using a grading rubric on rough drafts is the novel aspect of our work-in-progress. (10 points in total
existing assignments and course structure, the embedded technicalcommunications faculty member assessed where writing interventions could be added to the flowof the course without adding too much additional work for students or faculty. This resulted in: 1. Adding status memos where each team member, in rotation, took turns sending out weekly agendas, leading meetings, taking minutes, and communicating project status via the memo genre. 2. Embedding points in assignment rubrics dedicated to revision to incentivize students to review and incorporate changes based on previous instructional feedback. 3. A peer response activity for student presentations where each student in the class was guided in providing
continued success in industry [12]-[16]. Despite the importance of technicalcommunication skills, there exists a disparity between what academia reports the technicalcommunication capabilities of recently graduated engineering students is and what industry isreporting. Other research has found that 50 percent of mechanical engineering department headsconsidered recently graduated students to have strong technical communication skills, whereasindustry leaders considered only 9 percent of graduates to have strong technical communicationskills [17]. This disconnect may exist because of a lack of targeted communication and writingassignments that do not teach an iterative and peer review process for writing [18]. There mayalso be a need for engineering
Paper ID #42974Small Shifts: New Methods for Improving Communication Experiences forWomen in Early Engineering CoursesDr. Jonathan M Adams, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Prescott Jonathan Adams is an assistant professor of rhetoric and composition and the writing program administrator at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University in Prescott, AZ. His research on rhetorical theory, infrastructure, and communication pedagogy informs his teaching of courses in rhetoric, composition, and technical communication in engineering.Ashley Rea, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, PrescottBrian Roth, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical
knowledge of sound conventions[5]. Furthermore, student-centered approaches have been observed to be more successful whenthe student understands the genre conventions [5]. Three student-centered approaches forimproving writing include peer-to-peer, collaborative, and scaffolded.Peer-to-Peer ApproachesOne facet of peer-to-peer writing interventions is considering students’ academic level and thefeedback they can offer their peers. An approach to improving scientific writing sought todetermine if student academic year impacted the ability to provide effective peer-to-peer tutoring[6]. Peer-to-peer tutoring did show an improvement in student writing outcomes, regardless ofthe academic year of the peer. Conversely, researchers analyzing the writing
) Carnegie Mellon’s Global Communication Center, which has been moved to be partof their larger Student Academic Success Center [10].Other engineering programs might partner with English, technical communication, writingstudies, and/or communication programs to call on writing and teaching expertise. A moreminimal partnership might involve pairing engineering students with technical communicationediting students [11]. Alternately, some approaches involve creating cross-disciplinary teams tocollaborate on client-based projects, thus offering students the opportunity to learn from peers ina range of disciplines while working for a real client to solve a specific, real-world problem [7].These partnerships can involve an instructor based in a technical
paintings found in Indonesia—date back at least 43,900 years (George, 2019).Humans came into being with a set of basic survival needs, in which storytelling played a crucialrole. Storytelling transcends boundaries and disciplines, with fictional and non-fictional storiesbeing depicted and disseminated through art, technology, writing, and speaking. Because storiesplay a critical role in offering opportunities for meaning and connection in our lives, manyscholars and researchers have attempted to harness its benefits through storytelling interventionsand approaches (Pennebaker & Beall, 1986; Sharif et al., 2018; Suhr et al., 2017). Theseapproaches take on an array of forms, ranging from written journal entries to the oral sharing ofstories with
human experiences, values, and emotions. 8. Building Confidence and Resilience: Provide a supportive environment for students to experiment with creative expression, take risks, and overcome challenges, thereby building confidence and resilience in their academic and professional endeavors. 9. Cultivating Aesthetic Sensibility: Cultivate an appreciation for the aesthetic aspects of engineering design and innovation by exploring the beauty and elegance inherent in both poetry and technological solutions. 10. Facilitating Collaborative Learning: Promote collaboration and peer feedback by engaging students in group discussions, workshops, and constructive critique sessions to refine their poetry writing
calls withinengineering for civic engagement, diversity, equity, inclusion, and social and environmentaljustice.IntroductionAn engineering instructor recently told us, “For those of us who were trained as engineers in the1980's and have taught the past 20 years, there's a bit of a Pavlovian response thatcommunication means writing.” Indeed, “communication = writing” is a widely accepted proofamong engineering instructors and is confidently echoed by engineering students when asked,“What is communication?” Those with broader perspectives include “and presenting” to theequation, but even some of the most experienced and open-minded engineers and engineeringprofessors we have met stop there. Engineering students, becoming competitive in
scaffolding of an STS Posturespedagogy [24], a whole-person approach which aims for students to embody alternativeideologies and practices that stabilize one another. Through service learning, public engagement,practicums, colloquia and peer-bonding activities, students come to participate in culturalpractices that emphasize socio-technical systems thinking, human-centered design, and a cultureof care.We are interested in how students take up these ways of being and doing scaffolded by theSTS-LLC program. We provide observations and descriptions of many of the mutuallyreinforcing skills (practices) and “mindsets,” existing at different grain sizes, that students havefound salient. These salient practices and mindsets manifest in two basic ways: (i
lab activities in this course, students were tasked with a visual depiction to showdifferent types of bias. The details of this activity and resultant student visual depictions will bediscussed in this section. The lab for this week consisted of a 75 minute course block with areading and question prompts assigned for after the lab period. In the lab, the first activity forstudents was to discuss and define the word bias with their peers. At this point in the semester,students have not encountered a formal statistical definition of bias in data. In the next step,students were tasked to read a comic inspired by Dr. Joy Buolamwini’s work on gender shades(Buolamwini & Gebru, 2018). This comic was drawn by Vreni Stollberger and published in
determining the extent to which students’ engagement with Frankensteinwas able to facilitate ethical reflection and professional identity formation. To address thisquestion, the current study begins by situating the class discussion of the novel within thebroader aims and structure of the course; then, it analyzes a series of student written reflectionson moral aspects of the novel and its portrayal of Victor Frankenstein specifically. The analysisorganizes the data into salient themes that emerge from the written reflections illustrated byselections of student writing. The data indicate that students were able to articulate severalethical themes that emerge from the novel’s depiction of Victor Frankenstein’s practice of roguetechno-science and
7. Select exemplar text for each theme to include in write-up of analysisFigure 1. High-Level Depiction of Research Method. The steps in the blue boxes primarilyinvolve quantitative analysis, and the ones in green primarily involve qualitative analysis. 8 Although the method we developed mixes quantitative and qualitative researchmethods, the descriptions below separate its quantitative and qualitative aspects to makethe underlying logic clearer.3.1 Quantitative Methods: Frequency Analysis and Topic Modeling3.1.1 Extended Frequency Analysis Using the Search Functions of PEER The purpose of the
the university, the students take 15 courses including courses in art,cultural diversity, history, literature, mathematics, natural science, philosophy, social sciences, theology,and writing. The students also complete courses to graduate with a B.S. in General Engineering. Inaddition to the liberal arts core courses and engineering courses, all students also participate in a weeklyone-hour reflection seminar that they are enrolled in along with their peers in the same cohort. An aim forthe pedagogy and curriculum in the courses coded as engineering and the reflection seminars is to utilizethe affordances of a liberal arts framing to engineering to provide students opportunities to experience aliberal engineering education more
methods in this inquiry. The Administrator of the SouthGeneral IRB from the UCLA Office of the Human Research Protection Program informed mevia email on March 23, 2022 that formal review for this proposed work was not necessary.As mentioned above, this work was meant to be an exploration and a spotlight; it was not led byspecific research questions. The main purpose was to highlight the history and evolution of SE3through review of materials and conversations with SE3 leaders. Because of this, codes were notdeveloped prior to review of the data but were emergent and intuitive. Internal validity orcredibility [2] was achieved not through triangulation in terms of peer examination, but throughmember checks. I shared a draft write-up with
Engineering Mechanics with the core courses typicallyfound in Mechanical and Civil Engineering programs (Table 1). This choice also helped makethe program unique as many newer Engineering programs are focusing on Electrical andComputer Engineering. The program gives students time to explore the myriad of engineeringfields over their four years of study before deciding on a specialty.Table 1. Engineering Physics Curriculum at Randolph-Macon College. Credit hours inparentheses Engineering Physics Courses Science Courses and Math General Education Courses Prerequisites before 2021* Intro to Engineering (3) Introductory Physics (8) Writing and
with a peer or community member using a list ofsuggested questions about the module’s contents. Afterwards, we required students tocommunicate what they learned through completing and submitting a graded final deliverable.This deliverable could be a video, slide presentation, a written op-ed piece, or a piece of art aboutthe work they completed in the module. We evaluated the content of the modules through asurvey that assessed the students’ interest in the modules and determined the utility of themodules in the context of the study of computing. Based on the feedback of these surveys alongwith feedback from the instructors of the courses, we will further develop and improve thestructure and content of these modules and expand their reach to
’ institution as it has with manyother institutions across the US.As a Jesuit Catholic university committed to “the ideals of liberal education and the developmentof the whole person,”[11] LUM operates primarily as an undergraduate institution withconsiderable liberal arts requirements. Students who pursue LUM’s ABET-accredited bachelor’sof science in engineering must select one of four concentrations in electrical, computer,mechanical, or materials engineering. At the same time, all students are required to completecourses in the natural sciences and mathematics, as well as in the humanities and social scienceswherein reading, writing, and critical thinking skills are heavily emphasized [12]. The LUMCore Values Statement “calls upon the curriculum to
Paper ID #43129Design Iterations as Material Culture Artifacts: A Qualitative Methodologyfor Design Education ResearchDr. Grant Fore, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis Grant A. Fore, Ph.D. is the Assistant Director of Research and Evaluation in the STEM Education Innovation and Research Institute at IUPUI. As a trained anthropologist, he possesses expertise in qualitative methods and ethnographic writing. His primary research interest is in the teaching and learning of ethics in higher education through community-engaged and place-based pedagogies. ©American Society for
level is not, in and of itself novel. A simple Google Scholar search willgenerate over 24,000 citations elaborating upon such efforts. Peer-reviewed research on thistopic can be summarized into categories of innovation and specialized project development -including industry involvement (Goldberg, Cariapa, Corliss, et. al., 2014); professionalpreparation, and attribute/competency development (Hotaling, Fasse, Bost, et. al., 2012); andcapstone best-practices, pedagogy and assessment approaches (Newell, Doty, & Klein, 1990;Behdinan, Pop-Iliev, & Foster, 2014). Noticeably, however, the presence of recent innovativescholarship in this area appears scant.Looking back however to 1990, Newell, Doty, and Klein suggested that anecdotally, there
this study was obtained from a classroom fieldwork that took place fromAugust 2022 to February 2023. The study utilized a variety of methods to gather data. First,the instructors were asked to write reflective notes about their teaching experiences, whichwere used as autoethnographic accounts for analysis. Second, a research assistant attendedweekly instructor meetings and in-person classes at NYCU to observe the classroomdynamics between the instructors and the students. We are thus able to track how this courseevolved during the semester. Third, the research assistant conducted qualitative interviewswith the students after the semester ended to gain insight into their motivation for enrolling inthe course and their thoughts on the most
this type of mentorship (Leydens 2014, Nieusma 2011). One such initiative, theAccess Network, aims to do just that. The Access Network is a collection of programs (sites) thatare situated in U.S. universities that work towards a more equitable, diverse, inclusive, andaccessible version of the STEM community (Quan 2019). Access prioritizes student leaders, bothat the network-level and in their local sites, by empowering them to take the lead on actions andby providing support for this work. Access sites engage in activities that build inclusive learningcommunities, provide guidance through peer mentorship, and support growth in students’leadership around social justice.One major function of the Access Network is to connect students across these
of a scientist. Scientists aim to observe, infer,classify, predict, and hypothesize [14], [15]. In this sense the scientific method is based uponconsidering all of the different factors and data to form a conclusion. Another important aspect ofscience is that the “Scientific method does not insure the satisfactory solution of the problem...anymore than it insures the construction of an adequate hypothesis for the research problem” (p. 238)[16]. This statement suggests that a scientist’s mindset is primarily focused on the problemdefinition stage of problem solving.The problem-solving mindset is also evidenced in an expansive range of disciplines through theiracademic writing. It is apparent in social sciences, such as psychology, through
Program, graduateresearch theses have a theoretical grounding leading to action, which we call researchtranslation [1], that then leads to reflection, through dialogue with peers, communities, andliterature, that then leads to refining the initial theoretical framework and so on. For Theory,STS scholarship has contributed with theories and concepts of sociotechnical systems, change,and transfer [18][19]. For Transformation, STS provides concepts of knowledge transfer to aidresearch translation [20], [21] and a sociotechnical framework that has allowed us to transformexisting concepts like global competencies into global sociotechnical competencies inhumanitarian engineers [22]. For Reflection, STS provides students with the understanding
a keyaspect of professionalism in STEM. However, our findings also show that dominant figures havethe ability to drastically change LGBTQ+ students’ perspective of professionalism. We alsoexplore how LGBTQ+ students face a culture of silence in STEM environments, unable orunwilling to give voice to their discomfort. LGBTQ+ students experience a lack of solidarityfrom their peers, contributing to a silent, chilly experience in STEM classrooms and labenvironments. Our third theme, identity concealment, investigates how students conceal theirLGBTQ+ identities as a mechanism for survival in STEM. A lack of LGBTQ+ dominant figuresin STEM, a culture of silence, and reinforcement that straightness is a professional requirementin STEM has
reimaginingengineering education as one informed by tensions (Cheville and Heywood, 2016) and inherentto the “wicked” or sociotechnical pursuit of engineering design (Coyne, 2005; Norman &Stapper, 2015).We are writing from our positions as founding faculty members of an engineering department ina liberal arts institution coming from scholarly traditions in science and technology studies andengineering/engineering design education. In this paper, we hope to conceptualize “engineeringas conflict” as an analytical framework for engineering liberal education and share examplesfrom our curricular and program development work.Context and positioningBelow we share our disciplinary backgrounds and current teaching contexts to help situate howwe use the analytical
short profiles ofeach participant to elevate their unique stories and identities; the profiles were approved by theparticipants. Each chose a pseudonym for the study and some details about them are excludedintentionally to protect their privacy.Student ProfilesEsperanzaEsperanza was a sophomore student in the winter of 2022. She identifies as Christian, cis-gendered,female, heterosexual, and as multiracial and Hispanic but does not speak Spanish. Esperanza wasdiagnosed with a physical disability that causes nerve pain that impacts her hands and feet, whichaffects her ability to walk, write, and do lab work and results in physical exhaustion that requires her torest to recuperate. She also is affected by asthma and anxiety. She chose not to
coursework, suggesting that as they become more aware of theimportance of non-technical skills (i.e. professional skills such as communication, writing,creativity) they may feel less like they belong in the engineering profession.Previous findings have indicated that coursework highlighting the broader social aspects ofengineering can help attract and retain women, who view the social aspects of engineering asmore important than do their male peers. While we found strong positive relationships amongself-confidence, understanding the broad nature of engineering, sense of belonging inengineering, and attitudes toward persisting and succeeding in engineering for all studentsregardless of their exposure to sociotechnical coursework, our findings suggest
questions and how they interacted with their peers during thediscussion. The students held steadfast to the discussion guidelines, exhibiting respect andconsideration for their fellow students, allowing for a deeper conversation. As the class consistsof senior engineering students, the expectation was that they would be able to identify theengineering failures, but may struggle with the discussion on racial inequities due to a lack ofexposure in previous engineering courses. Surprisingly, the students understood and articulatedthe impact of institutional discrimination on the events leading up to and response to HurricaneKatrina.However, not all of the students reviewed the reading material prior to class. Since a largeportion of the class had not
computing and engineering students, wewill need to develop a research agenda that further elucidates this nascent area of study. Weparticularly expect that intentional work will be needed to uncover the as-yet poorly understoodecosystem surrounding TNB computing students, their advocates, and their allies. In particular,we see a clear need to understand intersections with race and disability, as the 2015 U.S.Transgender Survey showed that TNB people of color and people with disabilities had worseoutcomes than their already marginalized peers [3]. In order to be a force for change for thisgoal, we held a virtual workshop to develop a research agenda that includes TNB students inBPC/BPE for inclusive and intersectional policy, practices, and