Engineering Education Assessment (i2e2a). She ob- tained a B.S. in mathematics from Spelman College, a M.S. in industrial engineering from the University of Alabama, and a Ph.D. in Leadership and Policy Studies from Peabody College of Vanderbilt Univer- sity. Her teaching interests relate to the professional development of graduate engineering students and to leadership, policy, and change in STEM education. Primary research projects explore the preparation of graduate students for diverse careers and the development of reliable and valid engineering education assessment tools. She is a NSF Faculty Early Career (CAREER) and Presidential Early Career Award for Scientists and Engineers (PECASE) recipient
% in1963 to 54% in 1993, and the percentages of students who engaged in appropriate collaborationwith other students on homework assignments increased from 11% to 49% (Passow et. al.,2006). It can be due to increase of using collaborations in the classes. Several studies haveidentified variations in rates of cheating among students within different majors. With generalagreement among these studies that higher percentages of business and engineering studentsengage in cheating which are 91% and 82% respectively compared to students in the social andnatural sciences which are 73% and 71% respectively (McCabe, 1997, Mattei, 2008). Likewise,past research has identified that variations in rates of cheating among university students fromdifferent
research: discipline, community, or field? Journal of Engineering Education, 98(1), 39-52.11. Burt, R.S. (2004). Structural holes and good ideas. American Journal of Sociology, 110(2), 349-400.12. Coso, A., Louis, R., London, J., Ngambeki, I., and Sattler, B. (2012). Exploring the reasons for collaboration and cooperation among graduate student researchers. Paper presented at the ASEE Conference, San Antonio, TX.13. Olds, B.M. Moskal, B.M. and Miller, R.L. (2005). Assessment in engineering education: Evolution, approaches and future collaborations. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(1), 13-25.14. Mckenna, A.F. Yalvac, B. and Light. G.J. (2009). The role of collaborative reflection on shaping engineering faculty
Director, Maggie leads the SOCHEIntern Program, which employs nearly 300 students an- nually in cooperation with local government and small businesses, as well as the Air Force Institute of Technology (AFIT) and Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base. The program provides high impact experiential learning opportunities for students while generating economic benefit and enhancing community sustainability. Her work improves the efficiency of programs that support member institutions and increase the success of more than 120,000 students in southwest Ohio. Maggie has also provided guidance and leadership in the creation and evolution of regional initiatives such as the Dayton Water
Session at the ASEE 2014 Annual Conference, anddescribes a recently funded project (October 2013) under the Research Initiation Grant inEngineering Education (RIGEE) program. It is hypothesized that there is disconnect betweenthe principles outlined in Self-Determination Theory (SDT) and the actual classroomenvironment, thus creating a barrier to intrinsic motivation needed for student learning. Theproposed work is an empirical investigation to explore this disconnect in the context ofundergraduate engineering education. The primary tasks will be to (i) assess the Facultyknowledge of SDT; (ii) develop a measurement framework to assess the classroom environmentas it relates to SDT; and (iii) determine the association among Faculty knowledge of SDT
Build/Prototyping Brainstorming Prioritize/Select Items Fig.1. Cyclic Design Model Based on this typical design process model, we want to explore how technology students caneffectively learn from and collaborate with design students. Mattessich and Monsey’s survey incollaboration literature [25] has drawn a clear distinction among cooperation, coordination, andcollaboration. Cooperation is the informal relationship without a clearly defined commonmission, structure, or effort. Coordination shares the understanding of compatible missions, butauthority still rests within the
Nussbaum et al. show that note starters could encouragestudents to disagree and explore alternative perspectives in comparison to the collaborativelearning without this interface design 21.Weinberger conducted experimental research on effects of both social and epistemic (cognitive)cooperation scripts on cyber-enabled collaborative learning through web-based discussionboard24. Subjects in this research are colleague students of Educational Science. The socialcooperation script adopted in this research specified two roles for each of three students in thecollaborative learning team: (a) analyst, who is responsible for the preliminary and concludinganalysis of one learning case and responding to criticism from the learning partners (Weinberger
,discoveries, and products is crucial for ethical practice. It contends that listening canfacilitate transformational engagement between engineers and the public by a)challenging stereotypes on both sides, b) foregrounding the technical and ethicalrelevance of diverse knowledges, c) exposing relationships of structural inequality thatprivilege technical expertise, and d) replacing such relationships with partnerships oftrust that generate meaningful and effective solutions.Transformational listening lies at the heart of a graduate engineering ethics course atVirginia Tech and future online teaching modules, funded by the National ScienceFoundation (NSF). The goal is for students to experience the cognitive leap thatethnographic research methods can
program, funded by the National Science Foundation in order to expand international research opportunities for students in STEM fields. NanoJapan was recognized by the Institute for International Education in 2008 with the prestigious Andrew Heiskell Award for Innovations in Study Abroad. Dr. Matherly is the recipient of two Fulbright grants for international education administrators (Germany and Japan.) She has a BA in English and Political Science from the University of New Mexico, an MS in Education from Indiana University, and an Ed.D. in Education from the University of Houston. She teaches in the graduate program in education at The University of Tulsa.Dr. Mary E. Besterfield-Sacre, University of Pittsburgh Dr
forengineering and computer science graduates, began focusing heavily on student successinitiatives in 2004 with support from the Engineering Schools of the West Initiative, through theWilliam and Flora Hewlett Foundation. This first wave of initiatives was critically assessed, andengineering student success became a focal point for the CoE. Internal research conducted underthis grant exposed numerous roadblocks that impeded students' academic success. In 2010,another large grant, funded through the National Science Foundation Science Talent ExpansionProgram (STEP), was awarded to increase the numbers of students graduating with STEMdegrees. This grant engaged an interdisciplinary, cross-college team of STEM educatorspassionate about continuous
worked in research and develop- ment in artificial intelligence, computer vision, robotics, and sensor fusion. Prof. Nathan also has worked on computer-based tutoring environments for mathematics education that rely heavily on students’ own comprehension processes for self-evaluation and self-directed learning (so-called unintelligent tutoring systems). Prof. Nathan directed the STAAR Project, which studied the transition from arithmetic to al- gebraic reasoning. He served as Co-PI for the NSF-funded AWAKEN Project, which documented how people learn engineering in K-12, college, and the workplace. Dr. Nathan recently served as a member of The National Academy of Engineering (NAE)/National Research Council Committee on
Paper ID #10737Critical Thinking, Reflective Practice, and Adaptive Expertise in EngineeringNathan Hicks, University of Florida Current graduate student in materials science and engineering at the University of Florida. Spent three years teaching high school math and science before returning to graduate school for an advanced degree.Amy Elizabeth Bumbaco, University of FloridaDr. Elliot P. Douglas, University of Florida Elliot P. Douglas is Associate Professor of Materials Science and Engineering, Dean’s Fellow for Engi- neering Education, and Distinguished Teaching Scholar at the University of Florida. He conducts research
collaborative work both on classroom and online. • In the case of partial experiences, except just one exception, the concept collaborative work and student-centered environments was strange for them, generating rejection among the students, as there was a common trend at the start aiming for individual work, instead of splitting tasks and gather all work afterwards. • The search for creative answers to questions proposed was encouraged by the fact that results and conclusions had to be presented online, avoiding simple plagiarism. • The creation of random working groups generated some conflicts at the start of the experience, caused by the differences of skills and involvement attitudes of the group’s members
design the project sequence to build up student skills, but leave room for exploration and invention; Don’t underestimate the students’ ability and creativity. • Strategy #4: Focus on Learning Process, not the Results! Do incorporate as many key learning factors in project design; Don’t set the goal to be just completing the project. • Strategy #5: Provide guidelines to foster collaboration Page 24.454.5 Do use team-building activities and provide guidelines; Don’t assume students can work well in teams naturally. • Strategy #6: Build an online community to provide scaffolding Do build a learning community to provide
Page 24.1291.2include social justice; a consideration of the distribution of advantages and disadvantages insociety.4-6. The extent to which engineering students view the profession of engineering througha lens of SR with consideration of social justice is unclear.The Association of American Colleges & Universities (AAC&U)7 includes SR among theiressential learning outcomes for all college students, noting as sub-elements within this learningoutcome ethical reasoning and action, as well as civic knowledge and engagement. They alsostate: “in a democratic society, the goal must be to extend opportunity and excellence toeveryone, and not just to a fortunate minority.” 8 Toward meeting these aims, the AAC&Usupported the initiative Core
hadgraduated and did not provide post-graduation contact information. Finally, the paper providesrecommendations for future longitudinal studies. Page 24.501.32.0 MotivationFor the purposes of this work, community engagement (CE) is taken as an amalgamation ofvarious pedagogical methods, including service learning, community-service, and project-basedlearning, among others. The distinguishing aspect of CE in engineering education is theintentional design of the effort to incorporate service as a means to meet academic learningobjectives. Previous work has shown that CE has the potential for student development on thecognitive 16, 17, 43, 49, social
, individual ability, and personal responsibilities are also a part ofthe intellectual strand. The institutional strand focuses on identity based on affiliation and rolewithin the university and field. There are also institutional structures, resources, andresponsibilities that have an important influence on the identity of an early academic. Thenetwork strand includes professional relationships, organizations, and collaborations thatcontribute to professional identity. The three strands allow for a rich analysis of the complexnature of identity and how it evolves through time.This framework was used in an engineering education doctoral dissertation9 to explore theexperience of graduate students in optics and photonics. The findings of the study
systems that reason about domain knowledgeand diagnose student problems, to produce detailed analyses Figure 5. Students collaborate to answer the software questions related to circuit analysis.of student utterances and generate automatic feedback.CycleTalk, built upon the CyclePad simulation environment(above), investigated novel ways of using tutorial dialogue toteach thermodynamics [11]. The system empirically evaluateddialogue that invited students to negotiate problem-solvinggoals. For example, the system asked student to “do you thinkit is a good idea for the . . . temperature to be increased andkept high?” or “What happens to the steam quality if youincrease the maximum temperature?” Empirical resultsprovide strong evidence in favor
Paper ID #9336S-STEM: ENG2 Scholars for Success 2007-2013Ms. Sarah Cooley Jones, Louisiana State University Sarah Cooley Jones is an Associate Director, College of Engineering at Louisiana State University. Ms. Jones develops and manages student programs for undergraduate and graduate engineering students in- cluding programs focused on underrepresented student populations. These programs encompass scholar- ships, fellowships, and seminars/workshops that develop students academically and professionally. She joined LSU in 1992 as a College of Engineering research associate in the area of environmental analyses and worked
liberal arts discipline, similar to the natural sciences, socialsciences, and humanities (and the trivium, quadrivium, and natural philosophy of earlier times),by imbedding it in the general education requirements of a college graduate for an increasinglytechnology-driven and -dependent society of the century ahead.5. To achieve far greater diversity among the participants in engineering, the roles and types ofengineers needed by our nation, and the programs engaged in preparing them for professionalpractice.As described on the University website, “the Millennium Project is a research center at theUniversity of Michigan concerned with the impact of technology on our society, ourcommunities, our institutions, and our planet.”The report advocates
summer program at Carnegie Mellon) and currently sits on the Board of Di- rectors for the PGSS Campaign, a nonprofit that is responsible for raising the funds to finance and sustain the program.Sarah Marie Robb, Robert Morris University Sarah Robb is a graduate student at Robert Morris University in the Engineering Management MS pro- gram. She recently completed a BS in Engineering at Robert Morris with concentrations in mechanical and biomedical engineering. Graduating with honors, she has also successfully passed the Fundamen- tals of Engineering (EIT) exam. She has participated in summer research at Vanderbilt University and Worcester Polytechnic Institute, and most recently worked as a teaching assistant for the
content, credit transfer, and accreditation concerns are understood by all members, streamlining communication about curricular issues. As members of a strong collaborative community that meets regularly to establish personal ties among members, institutions are more likely to be helpful with special needs, e.g., facilitating access to internships in faculty research laboratories or in local companies.3. Guidance and Support. Exchange of a flexible number of students with a wide range of partner institutions who provide personalized guidance and support to exchange participants. The ability to provide both guidance and support is a necessary member requirement.4. Institutional Visibility. Increased visibility for engineering programs
. Correlations among the gender equity items on the attitudes toward STEM survey andgender attribution of engineers in students’ drawing were also examined.IntroductionThe demand for engineers in the United States workforce continues to increase1 but the numberof students studying engineering in college is not increasing enough to meet this demand2-3. Oneof the more significant reasons is the underrepresentation of females in engineering4-5 despite thefact that gender discrimination in engineering wages has been almost eliminated6. To helpencourage female students to study engineering, it is important to eliminate misinformation andnegative impressions about engineers and engineering7-9. Research on engineering recruitmentindicates that many young
whatapproaches have been shown to work well for others; in other words, to consider evidence-basedteaching practices. The engineering education literature has provided such evidence-basedapproaches for introduction to engineering courses1, capstone courses2, and topic-specificcourses.3,4 It has also provided teaching guidelines for approaches ranging from teaching usingactive learning methods5, improving student self efficacy6 and retaining engineering students7. Page 24.977.2This paper summarizes other evidenced-based teaching practices which have recently emerged from our collaborative research on the role of a student’s connection to community in his
engineering or computer science into mathematics and science classes can support and enhance learning within and across the STEM disciplines.Dr. Tamara J Moore, Purdue University Tamara J. Moore, Ph.D. is an Associate Professor of Engineering Education at Purdue University. Dr. Moore’s research is centered on the integration of STEM concepts in K-12 and higher education mathe- matics, science, and engineering classrooms in order to help students make connections among the STEM disciplines and achieve deep understanding. Her research agenda focuses on defining STEM integration and investigating its power for student learning. She is creating and testing innovative, interdisciplinary curricular approaches that engage
Assessment (i2e2a). She ob- tained a B.S. in mathematics from Spelman College, a M.S. in industrial engineering from the University of Alabama, and a Ph.D. in Leadership and Policy Studies from Peabody College of Vanderbilt Univer- sity. Her teaching interests relate to the professional development of graduate engineering students and to leadership, policy, and change in STEM education. Primary research projects explore the preparation Page 24.302.1 of graduate students for diverse careers and the development of reliable and valid engineering education assessment tools. She is a NSF Faculty Early Career (CAREER
focused on family learning. Ms. Wenger is deeply commitment to diversity issues and broadening access to science for underserved audiences. She is also passionate about professional development of youth and staff working in science centers and museums.Dr. Lisa D. McNair, Virginia Tech Lisa D. McNair is an Associate Professor of Engineering Education at Virginia Tech, where she also serves as Assistant Department Head of Graduate Programs and co-Director of the VT Engineering Com- munication Center (VTECC). She received her PhD in Linguistics from the University of Chicago and a B.A. in English from the University of Georgia. Her research interests include interdisciplinary collabora- tion, design education
Paper ID #10246Lessons in Manufacturing Education for the U.S. from Austria’s Dual-TrackEducation SystemDr. Victoria Ann Hill, Numeritics Dr. Victoria Hill is a Founder and Research Scientist of Numeritics, a research and consulting firm headquartered in Pittsburgh, PA. She was recently a part of a delegation of U.S. experts on Advanced Manufacturing and the STEM Talent Pipeline that traveled to Vienna, Austria as a part of the George C. Marshall Foundation’s efforts to increase cooperation between the U.S. and Austria in the area of Advanced Manufacturing. Dr. Hill has worked on STEM talent issues for many years, and recently
and engineers are electing to pursue careers elsewhere. The timing of the tenure clock is especially difficult for young families and, as research has shown, is even more challenging for women faculty. The exclusion of potential faculty who place high value work-‐life balance is not only a loss to the functioning of the academy, but also is damaging to the students who do not see role models among the faculty that they would like to (or even feel they can) emulate. Panelist 5: I think the biggest challenge that we have in creating gender equity in STEM is that, at every level
requirements (their history, political agendas, desires, forms of knowledge, etc.) is fully understood. (p. 125)18So how do basic and contextual listening relate to each of four design strategies? Listening indesign for technology may be constrained. For instance, in one of our research interviews, aformer graduate student and current faculty member stated that his undergraduate educationand early industry experience taught him that, in design contexts, he needed to “listen to thespec.” By that, he meant that he needed to listen to the specifications that were implicit orexplicit in the client’s explanation of the problem and desired solution. That trained his ear tobe a basic listener and to consciously filter out information that did not