Framework: The INCLUDE ApproachThe INCLUDE Framework (Innovation, Needs-driven design, Collaboration, Learning throughEmpathy, User-centered solutions, and Diversity-driven Education) offers a transformativeapproach to integrating intellectual disabilities into engineering education. It emphasizes threeinterconnected pillars: Multidisciplinary Collaboration, where diverse teams of engineers,healthcare professionals, sociologists, and disability advocates co-create holisticsolutions; Empathy-Driven Learning, which fosters understanding through immersiveexperiences, user engagement, and reflective practices; and Innovative Assessment Tools, whichevaluate technical feasibility, collaboration, empathy, and social impact using metrics likeempathy
program in the Mid-Atlantic region were tasked to write a reflective essay explaining the challenges faced intheir first four weeks in college. A thematic analysis of the qualitative data was used to analyzethe reflective essays.This “work in progress” paper will summarize the main results of the study. Based on theanalysis, we propose interventions to assist these students in their transition from high school tocollege. This project is relevant to institutions seeking to improve the retention of students intheir engineering programs.Background:First generation college students are defined as students whose parents completed only a highschool diploma or equivalent. Some researchers include in this classification those studentswhose parents
benefits, and environmental sustainability.In response to these complex and interrelated challenges, The Sustainability and SocialEntrepreneurship (SSEF), a collaborative effort between the University of Waterloo in Canadaand Harvey Mudd College in the United States, launched its inaugural iteration in the summer of2023. The SSEF aims to foster innovative, human-centered, and sustainable urban designsolutions through interdisciplinary international collaboration. The SSEF reflects anunderstanding of the multifaceted nature of urban problems and seeks to bring together diverseperspectives and expertise to address these issues.The program was structured as a multi-week, multi-institutional pilot that brought together nineexceptional third-year
opportunities fora diverse group of undergraduate research assistants; and 2) To develop a novel adaptive real-timeoptical sensing algorithms in near-Ultraviolet (UV) spectrum by combining reflected-UV and UVfluorescence techniques to transform our ability to detect biological surface contaminants, such assaliva, that could potentially contain infectious pathogens. The reflected-UV and UV fluorescenceimaging methods are used in various scientific, industrial, and medical optical sensing systems,such as in germicidal irradiation (disinfecting), digital forensics, food/agricultural industries,remote sensing, space science (NASA Perseverance), etc. The recent use of UV light surfacedisinfection mobile robot platforms and devices has shown promising
responded to an IRB-approved follow-up survey about their learningexperiences. Reflective student feedback from both multidisciplinary trips indicated thatengineering students deepened their understanding of chosen topics in consideration of global,cultural, and societal factors, and that the non-engineering students enjoyed the visits more thanthey expected and overcame initial fears about engineering-related coursework, discoveringengineering practices in many aspects of their social lives. Overall, the students gave positivefeedback about the multidisciplinary trips and demonstrated achievement of the learningoutcomes. In the future, the authors plan to continue collaborations to further integrate the coursemodules and regularly evaluate the
: Expanding STEM opportunities for females is crucial not only to address longstanding gender disparities in science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) fields, but also to unlock a broader spectrum of innovation, foster inclusive economic growth, and ensure that future advancements reflect the diverse needs of society. Systemic barriers contributing to the gender gap in STEM disciplines are deeply embedded in societal norms, institutional structures, and cultural expectations, particularly for people of color. Race tends to amplify the gender gap in STEM for women of color by layering unique stereotypes, cultural expec- tations, and systemic exclusions. Addressing the gender
infiltrates many areas of engineering andscience. Yet within engineering programs, students often have few opportunities to developexpertise in data science or even to explore how data science is relevant to their degreespecializations. This paper reports on an NSF-funded study of a program that prepares STEMstudents to engage with data science in coursework and then mentors them as they secureinternships and complete a capstone that demonstrates their application of data science expertise.Drawing on a mixed-methods study, including student reflections, capstone project assessment,and survey reporting, this paper suggests not only that students make deep connections betweentheir existing majors and data science but also that students trained in our
equitable model to STEM education.1. The InSciTE model1A. The InSciTE mission, values and program objectives:InSciTE was created in Spring 2022 from a coalition of 14 faculty from all 9 academicdepartments at CSE to form a truly multidisciplinary council. The council is formed by facultywith diverse ethnic and intersectional identities, a reflection of the authentic partnership andleadership of faculty impacted by enduring inequities in STEM and of the ethos of InSciTE. Thecouncil guided the creation of the program with all decisions reached through consensusbuilding. The council defined the mission of the program as “to create an equitable student-driven environment for undergraduate students to develop skills on interdisciplinarycommunication
document are those of the authors and do not reflect thepolicy or position of the U.S. Naval Academy, Department of the Navy, the Department ofDefense, or the U.S. Government.IntroductionAs the oldest of the 6 undergraduate Robotics Engineering degree programs in the United States,we reflect on national trends and program-level lessons learned since we modernized ourcurriculum a decade ago. After a brief overview of our program, we discuss changes in therobotics education landscape over the last ten years, including the proliferation of degreeprograms, issues in accreditation, challenges in hiring, the expectations of students andadministrative challenges. Some of the content is based on our own program observations andassessments, other data
and communicate across a variety of disciplines,which might include product design and development, installation, testing, operation, andmaintenance [2].All of these signs reflect a growing awareness of the need for an educational model that willrespond to rapidly evolving challenges. The National Academy of Sciences has raised theconcern that the current educational model should better align existing engineering models withsuch emerging challenges, broadening the context through an increased number of thematic callsand engaging with a wider range of users. In addition, academic literature on Science,Technology, and Society has called for a move towards a heightened awareness of the contextand factors that influence engineering decision
student cohorts now included undergraduates from Indonesia, Europe, andSouth America and from other Asian countries such as Thailand, China, and Taiwan,reflecting a more diverse and globally representative student body. The breakdown ofparticipants’ nationalities in each module was as follows: For non-COIL STEM modules, thestudent body at the Indonesian university consisted solely of Indonesian undergraduates,whereas participants in the STEM COILs were a mixture of ‘international’ students in Japan(attending in person) and Indonesian undergraduates attending online. Participants in thehistory modules (both COIL and non-COIL) were mainly from Europe and South America,partially from Asian countries such as Thailand, China and Taiwan attending from
program was used,with mentors following a specific form for each meeting.The mentoring sessions involved:Meeting 1: Obstacles to Success and Opportunities for SuccessThis session involved a discussion on what went wrong during the first semester and whatopportunities are available for success. It provided an opportunity for the mentor and mentee tomeet each other and reflect on the previous semester, highlighting both achievements and missedopportunities.Table 1: Obstacles to success. Students were asked to complete this section by choosing the top5 obstacles (number them in order from most important to least important). Study Habits Finding a good place to Going to class study
experiences and instructionalactivities with acceptable evidence.[18] To ensure a longitudinal study, we will include at leastone reflective exercise in each major program element, including recruitment meetings, summercamps, courses, JEDI seminars, and research/practice experience. Finally, the researchers willobserve student, faculty, and stakeholders' interactions during these activities. We will usegrounded theory to identify emerging patterns and themes for the analysis. We will use instrumentsfrom the works cited in the previous section to provide a coding scheme of expected categories.[19]5. Design of the Sustainable Engineering MinorThe new Minor will establish and enculturate a Sustainability Engineering Mindset – to bedeveloped through
as it coincided with the removal of the SI sessions, which had beena key component of their academic support during their first year. However, it remained unclearwhether these challenges were primarily due to the absence of SI or if they reflected the typicalstruggles students face when transitioning into more advanced coursework and the increasedacademic demands of their second year. To determine if the decrease in performance was uniqueto the SSP students, their quarterly GPA was compared to other engineering students withsimilar academic progress over the first year.First and Second Year Engineering at Louisiana Tech UniversityThe students in this study completed their first and second years of engineering at LouisianaTech University
, which is our desired result of the relevant cognitive load.This theory was used in designing the instructional modules for the course where experiment-centric pedagogy was implemented, as shown in Figure 2. 1. Information 2. Purpose of the 3. Instructional module Process 4. Reflection about the module a. Module Title a. Questions a. Materials needed a. Reflection b. Placement within the b. Module objectives b. Procedures curriculum c. Formative assessment c. Primary/ Secondary audience d. Summative assessment d. Standards
development. These business achievements are reflected in his academic activities through the designing of lectures and mobility programs with practical implementation perspectives. Ishizaki has been actively presenting and publishing his academic achievements at international conferences in the Asia Pacific region and North America such as APAIE, WERA, and NAFSA. He earned a Master of Business Administration majoring in international business at the University of Southern California in the United States of America, and a Bachelor in Law at Hitotsubashi University in Japan.Dr. Maria Anityasari, Sepuluh Nopember Institute of Technology Maria Anityasari is the Director of ITS Global Engagement. Institut Teknologi Sepuluh
pressabout Tesla. These are not just technical issues, but ethical violations have been reported as well.A simple Google search can help one find these news items. Students were asked to researchsome of these articles and analyze Tesla’s vehicle electrification effort through the Design Justicelens using answers to the following questions as guides: Who do you think created the originaldesign? Who benefitted/benefits from it? Who were/would be harmed from it? What designjustice principles are being violated, if any?Upon completion of the above tasks, all students were asked to reflect on what they learned byanswering the questions: a. What are some things you learned about Design Justice? b. Name at least three new things you
of the COVID-19 pandemic, to the current year’s team concentrating onimplementing sensors in the hand and refining the ergonomics of the existing design. The paperwill also include student & faculty reflection and discussion of the faculty facilitation needed forsuch a service-based project and how engineering educators can consider implementing suchprojects into their programs.IntroductionInterdisciplinary team-based projects in engineering education are an approach to experientiallearning which can provide students with a diverse learning opportunity to work closely withindividuals from different disciplines [1, 2, 3]. Some of the benefits of participating on aninterdisciplinary team include unique solutions to solving complex problems
same institution. That earlier project, which involved thedesign and implementation of a cross-college, transdisciplinary model of instruction, providedvaluable experiential and analytical grounding for this study. Drawing from that shared foundation,this analysis gained a deeper understanding of the complexities of convergence education, enablingus to identify recurring themes related to course design, team formation, and the broaderimplications for transdisciplinary pedagogy. As before, this collaborative team was able to haverich discussion about transdisciplinary teaching and learning and educational transformationtogether accordingly. This thinking is reflected in the current paper. The researcher also conducted semi-structured
reflected on the implications of unsustainable practices such as pollution, deforestation, and overconsumption, recognizing the need for individual and collective action to mitigate environmental degradation and promote sustainability. (A)(3) Recognition of Societal Responsibilities: Students acknowledged their role in creating awareness and promoting societal sustainability. They discussed the importance of raising awareness about environmental issues and advocating for sustainable practices. Students highlighted the significance of collective action and community engagement in addressing global challenges such as climate change and resource depletion. They expressed a commitment to positively changing their lifestyles and
2023-2024 accreditation cycle[1]. ASEE has created the Diversity Recognition Program (ADRP) which recognizesengineering schools implementing DEI initiatives [2]. Hofstra’s Engineering school underwentreaccreditation for six programs in the 2023-2024 cycle and participated in the pilot of the DEIcomponents of Criteria 5 and 6. In addition, the university was accorded renewal of Bronzestatus under the ASEE ADRP. The present paper discusses the plans and assessments utilized toreach these goals.The need to address DEI in the region where the university resides is critical in the attraction andretention of students to engineering. The region is a diverse metropolitan area in which thestudent body reflects the diversity. In addition, the
undergraduates toward advanced degrees but also help develop crucialresearch skills like data analysis and problem-solving [6], [11]. The diverse nature of UREs leads to arange of skill development and interest among participants, adding complexity to the landscape ofundergraduate research experiences. Thus, the type of UREs could develop a varying degree of skills andinterests.Theoretical Framework In the development of this research, we have applied the theoretical framework of engineeringstudent identity [17] to develop our interview protocol for a large project. In this framework, there arethree key constructs that contribute to one’s identity as an engineering student. The first is engineeringstudent interest, which reflects curiosity and
the problem that has been proposed to them. In theMDC course, the instructors have the students spend 4 weeks at the beginning of the projectidentifying the problem and root causes before beginning work on possible solutions. Thisprocess was emphasized for students to reflect and modify their problem identification as theygain knowledge progressing through the design process. The instructors reinforced thisrelationship between their performance and knowledge gained through revisions to past writtenreports that were used to build on their project. Retrieval practice helps students to monitor their learning by encouraging them to retrieve priorknowledge [30 – 46]. The MDC instructional team implemented this practice by giving writtenfeedback to
differences could be driven by other factors, such as characteristics ofparticipants in these groups, different environments or context that they face, among other things.Tech companies have for decades favored A/B tests to understand adoption choices bycustomers. They also conduct experiments to determine the most effective approaches formanaging people and maintaining a productive environment. An example is Lazear (2000) whostudied the impact of piece rates on productivity. The study estimated a 44% overallimprovement in productivity due to piece rates by gradually implementing a new compensationscheme. Around 22% of this was due to greater effort (the incentive effect), and the remaining22% reflected sorting (better new hires) or potentially some
submit student feedback, reflections onstudent performance, and proposed action for course improvements.4 Advantages and Disadvantages of Each ToolEach assessment tool has advantages and disadvantages. Table 2 shows the strengths of eachtool. Excel, Google Forms, and Canvas are readily available to the university community. Whilethe spreadsheet-based methods are easy to use, they are tedious for the coordinator to compile.Spreadsheet tools and SearchLight require faculty to submit an outcome score for each student atthe conclusion of the course. While these scores are linked to signature assessment instruments,it is not clear how faculty aggregate performance and determine the scores. Canvas overcomesthis limitation by clearly linking the
percentage of A grades earned, but the 10:40 am and 11:45 am class times always had 50% or more of the students achieving an A. • The sections with the lowest grades, C or failing grades, were both 8:30 am sections and SP1-9:35 am sections. The other 9:35 am section had a decrease of 10% in the number of students that earned C grades.Based on these results for the final course grade, the design course had the highest percent of Agrades for the 9:35 am section, and the mechanics course had the highest percent of A grades forthe 10:40 am and 11:45 am sections. These times reflect students’ preferred times for students orthe times when their performance is highest during the day, as reflected in their course grades.While not
; (iv) Student voice and choice; (v)Reflection; (vi) Critique and revision; and (vii) Public product. The public product in this instancewas this publication.The four graduate student members of this project came from two different institutions, three fromthe University of Massachusetts Lowell, majoring in Biomedical Engineering, ElectricalEngineering and Mechanical Engineering and one from the University of the District of Columbia,majoring in Mechanical Engineering. The group co-created the material for this research withfeedback from three faculty mentors in the two participating institutions. Faculty and studentinteraction is crucial in the co-creation process, and it has been found to provide many benefits onstudents’ educational
members who develop and teach courses selected as TI courses receive avariety of incentives, such as small stipends for new courses or modifications to existing courses,financial support for external speakers, and, if the course is team-taught, full teaching credit foreach faculty member for the first iteration that the course is offered.The process for selection as a TI course is competitive. A call for proposals goes out in Octobereach year for potential multidisciplinary courses for the following academic year. Proposals arethen due by the middle of January. The proposed course must align with the TI mission andaddress contemporary and emerging societal challenges. The proposals require a tentativesyllabus that clearly reflects the mission of
follows the constructivist learning theory, when the gummy is pressed.which posits that knowledge construction occurs bestthrough hands-on experiences and reflections on those experiences [7]. By engaging in this simpleexperiment, students not only learn about basic science and engineering concepts but alsopotentially develop critical thinking and problem-solving skills essential for their future academicand professional endeavors.MethodsWe demonstrated a simple pressure sensor using fiveproducts with varying levels of softness, all of whichare readily accessible to students (Figure 2(a)). Theproducts tested (each costing less than $15) includedthree types of gummy candies: Life Savers, which arehigh softness (Figure 2(b)); Haribo Goldbears
engineering. 5.1 Increased my awareness of job opportunities in engineering. 5.1 Equipped me with knowledge and skills to advance towards my career… 4.9 Exposed me to engineers who reflect my identity (e.g. gender,… 4.8 Expanded my industry network 4.8 Assissted me in acquiring a position 4.6 Figure 6. Info SessionMentorship Assessment Assessment (Arranged by Mean) Arranged by Mean