support tool hosted by our institution and is approvedby our Institutional Review Board (IRB) [HUM# 00135376]. The data set is from two semestersof a team-based, project-based introductory engineering course with a total of 118 studentresponses analyzed (N = 118).Introduction and MotivationThere are many examples in the engineering education literature of teamwork being particularlyfraught for women. Specifically, women sometimes end up completing less technical work andmore project management work [1, 2, 3]; they are sometimes spoken over in conversations [4, 5];and they are sometimes evaluated by themselves and their peers according to different standardsthan their peers who are men [6, 7, 8, 9]. All these examples led us to examine how
design, including the ability to switch between notes and chords,additional instrument voicings, an LCD screen, a shutdown command, and a custom-madeenclosure. The students wish to see variations of this project implemented in hospitals, nursinghomes, and schools so that no matter the stage of life or the physical capability, such as weakmuscle issues or joint-related disabilities, the user enjoys playing the piano. We also hope thisproject will reflect the power of engineering in a liberal arts education through the combination ofmultiple disciplines, experiences, skills, and interests.1. IntroductionThe Cornell College engineering major, established in 2013, focuses on general engineering andprepares students with the knowledge they need for
education. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2020 How to Be a Graduate Student (Before I Forget): A Collection of Experiential Wisdom 1. The Case for Sharing WisdomOverall, the number of graduate and doctorate degrees awarded in the US has grown over the course ofthe early 21st century [1]. Fields like engineering and education have been producing PhDs for severaldecades, however recent shifts technology have changed the process of a PhD drastically [2]. The specificnew field of a PhD in engineering education came formally into existence in 2004 with the creation ofPurdue’s School of Engineering Education [3], with programs at
Learning (CETL) and three years as a faculty member at Olin College of En- gineering in Massachusetts. Alexandra’s research aims to improve the design of educational experiences for students by critically examining the work and learning environments of practitioners. Specifically, she focuses on (1) how to design and change educational and work systems through studies of practicing engineers and educators and (2) how to help students transition into, through and out of educational and work systems.Dr. Walter C. Lee, Virginia Tech Dr. Walter Lee is an assistant professor in the Department of Engineering Education and the assistant director for research in the Center for the Enhancement of Engineering Diversity (CEED
individual teachers, so attendance and all materials are free for educators. Since 2017,REACT has hosted ninety K-12 teachers from seventy different school districts. Similarworkshops are being developed at other universities based on REACT’s model. At times, thedistance between graduate school and K-12 education can seem very large, but as one REACTparticipant stated: “REACT has been an effective way to bridge the gap between the researchcommunity at the University and the education sphere.” I. Introduction & BackgroundWith the rising focus on engineering and inquiry-based science education, it is becoming morecrucial to incorporate real-world concepts and applications of science and engineering into theclassroom[1]. This need is heightened
better understand the problem itself. This study is aiming totake a close-up look at how engineering students distribute their time between in-class and out-of-class activities. Particularly, we will be looking at how students dedicate time to studying,how their time is spent in lectures and in labs, and how their time balances overall between in-class and out-of-class activities.Reviewing the literature to see how other researchers study students’ time revealed a couple ofstudies that particularly focus on students’ time management. Case studies [1], [2] were lookingat to what extent the students are able to manage their time and how that affects their academicperformance. Some other researchers focused on the time spent on various activities
individual mentoring, peer mentoring, and faculty/PI (principalinvestigator) mentoring which is the focus of this paper.Conducting undergraduate research is one way undergraduates obtain a mentor in highereducation. The time spent working on a research project creates a personal and professionalconnection within the research group, due to the student’s reliance on the expertise from anotherindividual [1]. Therefore, becoming a student researcher inherently involves mentorship. Thisexperience can vary from individual to individual, as some students receive mentorship from oneperson or multiple individuals. There’s also a great breadth of quality related to mentorship in theresearch setting. Our research considers the type of mentorship experienced
that individual student performance is not significantly correlated withgrades earned on the team project. Finally, we observe a negative, though insignificant, trendbetween teams with a higher standard deviation of individual student exam performances (biggerspread) and overall team grades. That is, teams with more dispersion in exam performance earnlower grades in this sample.INTRODUCTIONTeam-based assignments and other collaborative learning methods are commonly found inundergraduate engineering programs across the world, and they are especially prevalent infirst-year introductory engineering courses as well as final-year capstone projects [1-4].Team-based learning has been shown in previous studies to improve students’ academicachievement
Polytechnic InstituteMelissa Shuey, Rensselaer Polytechnic InstituteMarta TsyndraMakayla Wahaus, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Makayla Wahaus received her Bachelors of Science in Sustainability Studies and Applied Physics from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in 2020. After completing her senior thesis, ”Community Supported Agriculture in the NY Capital Region: Pathways, Economics, and Community”, she plans to farm with a local CSA producer while navigating to her desired career path. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2020 Student Perspectives on Navigating Engineering PathwaysLike many of the National Academy of Engineering’s consensus studies, the 2018 Pathwaysreport [1] tells
TheCitadel continues to adapt to engineering students’ evolving needs and opportunities.IntroductionEngineering students show strong preferences for experiential learning opportunities, likeinternships, but need enhanced communication skills to ensure successful professional growthand experience. Successful professional experiences and preparation are supported by thecontinuing development of engineering students’ communication abilities, a view supported bythe National Academy of Engineers [1], [2] and the most recent vision statements of theAmerican Society of Mechanical Engineers [3], the American Society of Civil Engineers [4], aswell as ABET [5].To sustain student engagement, education literature advises educators to create active
importance of graduate mentors for UR students is highlighted by researchers whoclaim 1) UR students have more frequent meetings and interactions with their graduate mentorsthan their faculty advisors and 2) graduate students are often asked by their faculty advisors to bethe main points of contact for UR students. The relationship between graduate students and URstudents, however, is not without challenges. Among the challenges include graduate students’lack of knowledge in skills and practices in mentoring UR students. Therefore, the purpose ofthis study is to identify skills and practices that graduate mentors have successfully employed inan UR research setting and that undergraduate students have found to be beneficial.Undergraduates enrolled in
. Perry’sDevelopmental Scheme). 4 A student typically enters the university in positions 1 or 2 with avery ‘right or wrong’ point of view. As the student progresses through their collegiate career andengages in experiences, they transcend through positions 2, 3, and 4; ideally graduating inposition 5 (or higher) where they have acquired the ability to perceive knowledge and values asrelative, contingent and contextual.4 Because the university is an educational environment, theintellectual development of the student from positions 1 or 2 to position 5 is an important part ofthe transformation of the student and the goal of the institution.Experiences play an important role in this transformation and sadly, not all experiences arepositive; potentially having a
student participants to explore and record theirexperiences as undergraduate research assistants.Research Questions and Data CollectionThe self study described here was motivated by a desire to document students’ thoughts andexperiences in “real time” as they evolved during the course of an undergraduate researchexperience. To investigate the efficacy of this approach, the following research questions weredeveloped for this study: 1. Are conversational prompts effective in encouraging reflection and discussion? 2. Are students interested in initiating and responding to spontaneous conversations? 3. Do the conversations reflect changes in students’ understanding or experiences over time?The self-study involved two types of Facebook-mediated
. Page 23.625.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2013 From Serious Leisure to Knowing Organizations: Information and Knowledge Management Challenges in Project-Based Learning Student Engineering TeamsIntroduction Critiques of contemporary engineering education have highlighted issues of limitedapplied and “soft” skills development [5], retention issues in STEM education [13] and concernabout a mismatch with industry demands for graduates [1]. Facing similar challenges, medical and nursing schools have leveraged problem-basedlearning (PBL) strategies where students engage medical cases collaboratively and independently,with faculty serving as
about changeprocesses and change agents. A synopsis of these discussions is provided in Table 1. Table 1. Synopsis of Change Agents Change Agent Characteristics Aliases Raises awareness among people, find connections to what’s already Mr. A being done Communicates vision to develop awareness Possesses the mental complexity to deal with challenges of change, Mr. Am understanding of “big picture” Facilitates change leading to capacity to deal with social complexity Conscious connection to world as participatory
showed not only a high degree ofsatisfaction among the graduate student population, but also a general improvement of skills ineach of the three main focus areas.IntroductionAlthough industry requires young Ph.D.s. with well-rounded professional skills,1 many newgraduates lack these skills. First, with large number graduate students matriculating frominternational undergraduate programs, many students lack the ABET-required skills such asworking in multidisciplinary teams; understanding professional and ethical responsibility; andunderstanding the economic, environmental, and societal impact of their decisions.2,3Communications skills are also an issue.4 Second, for many universities the typical target forplacement of doctoral students is in
of positive researchexperiences for future program participants.IntroductionEngineering colleges and universities are embracing mentoring programs as one strategy toimprove retention and persistence of their diverse undergraduate populations.1 A one-on-onementoring relationship provides individualized support for mentees, and a sense that a realperson actually cares about the mentee’s progress and development within their chosenengineering degree track. The connection between having a caring mentor and undergraduatepersistence in engineering was initially described in Seymour and Hewitt’s 1997 study TalkingAbout Leaving, as the ‘unsupportive culture’ of math, science, and engineering was one of theprimary reasons undergraduates chose to
research experience do so from theundergraduate students’ perspectives; this paper focuses on this experience from the researchmentors’ perspectives. In this paper, the experiences of seven research mentors who wereinvolved with the course in the fall 2011 and spring 2012 semesters are described. The paperanswers the following research questions: (1) What benefits result from being a research mentor?and (2) In what ways does being a research mentor prepare graduate students for their futurecareers?Data were collected via individual interviews with the research mentors at the end of eachsemester. Using situated learning as the theoretical framework, the data were analyzed todetermine themes that characterized the research mentor experience. The
. A notable increase was observed in theaverage GPA between general male students and member male students. Femalestudents consistently produced higher GPA for all study groups.Organizational Structure and ActivitiesAcross the engineering disciplines are many organizations for student participation.These organizations range from honor societies in which students must be invited toparticipate or more general discipline specific organizations that are open to all students.Figure 1 is an abbreviated list of student organizations (Engineering StudentOrganizations, 2012): The organizational structure of many of these student run organizations is similar.Generally, the structure follows the format shown in Figure 2. Typically
, the GSC discussed whatrequirements should be expected from potential presenters (i.e. a full paper or just an abstract).The GSC executive council ultimately decided that an abstract submission would be sufficientfor the conference. A smaller committee within the GSC was tasked with developing the criteriathat would be given to the students prior to their submissions. The abstract guidelines given tothe students were broken up into two sections, listed below, one being content and the otheradditional syntax related guidelines.Content Guidelines:1. Research Need - A clear research need should be presented and research should be original.2. Approach - Explain the methodology associated with your research process.3. Outcomes - Research results or
strengthened and developedthroughout my graduate program. These critical perspectives challenged my assumptions and Page 25.756.2caused me to question the purpose of my actions. Through analysis of my personal memoriesand reflection entries, I have organized my critical perspectives into four categories: 1. Challenges in Undergraduate Engineering 2. Other Opportunities 3. My Graduate Degree Program 4. Benefit for Employers, Benefit for MyselfChallenges in Undergraduate EngineeringI realize that during my undergraduate years, I was a passive stakeholder in my education—Iallowed the curriculum of the school to act on me. A personal
. Throughoutthis section, these four areas will be briefly mentioned. However, a more in-depth look at eachof these components will be discussed in later sections.Supplemental Instruction LeaderThe Supplemental Instruction (SI) program[1] supported by the Academic Success Center atClemson University was one of the first motivating factors leading me toward a future career inacademia. In this program, undergraduate students led three one-hour study sessions per weekfor a course they had successfully earned an “A” average in during a previous semester. Thesessions typically consisted of additional practice problems and activities for students in thecourse. The SI Leaders attended class with the students, allowing the sessions to be tailored tothe material
teaching assistant training programs.1 Introduction In engineering education, motivation is often discussed from a programmatic perspective(how do we motivate students to enroll in engineering programs?) or a curricular perspective(how do we motivate students to persist?). These perspectives often overlook the importance ofmotivation within the classroom and the daily processes of teaching and learning engineering.Motivation helps students focus their attention on learning activities, proactively seek newlearning activities, and persist in those activities until learning goals are reached1. Although future engineering professors and instructors have a sense of the centrality ofmotivation in learning engineering2, they are often
stated by McCracken et al., the average studentperformance witnessed in their study was even lower than they expected.1 This issue is Page 24.455.2exacerbated within the context of the Engineering Models courses due to the additional subjectmatter intended to provide context within engineering, mathematics, and the sciences included inthe course. In addition, the Engineering Models I and II courses are predominately taken byfirst-year students so they are also dealing with the sudden change in school environment.Therefore, methods need to be developed to help students develop an understanding ofcomputing concepts to allow them to focus on the
exceeds the Global, K-12, Retired and Life membershiptypes within ASEE; a significant change from 2011 when the membership had surpassed onlythe Life membership type.1 Students comprise between 1% (Engineering Technology) and 22%(Engineering Leadership Development Constituent Committee) of the division memberships,which is substantially less than the 83% student representation within the SD in June 2013. Themajority (88%) of divisions have less than 11% student members. These statistics could beattributed to a number of factors, including interest and a lack of student-specific programmingby each of the ASEE divisions.The population of ASEE student members represents an obvious group of potential futureprofessional members of ASEE. It is critical
search process, and what types of positions are they obtaining?BackgroundAround 2005-2006, the field of engineering education expanded with two major events. First,the Journal of Engineering Education officially moved to a research focused journal(5, 6) andPurdue University granted its first Ph.D. in engineering education.1 Before that time, researchersentered engineering education through a variety of pathways2, which directly contributed to the Page 24.496.2ever expanding and interdisciplinary nature of engineering education. (For additionalinformation on the history of engineering education please review the article by Jesiek,Newswander, and
knowledge domainsremains a challenging task from both knowledge development and systems engineering processmodeling perspectives. However, the longitudinal examination (as well as my ongoingintrospection) regarding “Simulating Kelly” as an engineering process has helped to provide bothpersonal benefits and research outcomes. In addition, it is hoped that the student’s experienceprovides useful insights regarding the valuable role of research apprenticeships forundergraduate engineering students, regardless of their future industry, graduate education, orengineering domain career development plans. Page 24.584.6References 1. Caldwell, B. S. (2013
replaced or the one (or two) of the DC power supplies couldbe made available for students to use to complete the exercise. The impact of the use of this kitto student outcomes has not yet been assessed and is planned in future work.1. H. Klee and J. Dumas, “Theory, simulation, experimentation: an integrated approach to teaching digital control systems,” Education, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 37, pp. 57-62, 1994.2. K. A. Connor, B. Ferri and K. Meehan, “Models of mobile hands-on STEM education,” in 120th ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Atlanta, GA, 2013.3. D. Millard, M. Chouikha and F. Berry, “Improving student intuition via Rensselaer’s new mobile studio
rigorous empirical knowledge base to support the transformation ofengineering education practice. For example, in the opening plenary at the 2011 AmericanSociety for Engineering Education (ASEE) Annual Conference, presenters focused onaccelerating the use of research in practice. 1 This investment has accelerated the need to askquestions such as the following: What are the implications for action of our research? Whatgeneral ideas does our community have about how research can promote action? and What canbe done to accelerate the rate at which research is used to transform engineering education? Suchquestions are part of the phenomenon known as translational work, or the work of connectingresearch to action. While such work has always been
Doctoral Dissertation Committee in Engineering EducationIntroductionThe engineering education PhD has been rapidly growing over the past couple of years. As ofright now there are 20 institutions that offer some type of doctoral degree in engineeringeducation. These degrees include engineering PhD’s with a concentration in engineeringeducation, PhD in STEM education, or Engineering Education degrees similar to those offered atVirginia Tech, Purdue, and Utah State University[1-4]. Several other traditional engineeringdoctoral programs such as aerospace, electrical, and mechanical engineering programs offerdoctoral students the opportunity to pursue engineering education research dissertations that aredirectly related to