both to applied leadership andacademic foundations, so the intentional composition of an engineering residence hall helps tocultivate the sphere of community responsibility.Recommendations for Future ResearchIn addition to the reflection essays, students built an online e-portfolio where they wrote abouthow current and past experiences help them develop the skills necessary to be an engineer. Werefer to these skills as engineering competencies. An excerpt from the course syllabus describingthe assignment is shown in Appendix A.Future research can focus on analyzing data from students’ e-portfolios. Based on our findingsfrom the analysis of the reflection essays, we anticipate that students’ e-portfolio responses mayreflect their transition
formal learning outcome in the syllabus for ME4723 Interdisciplinary CapstoneDesign. In some cases, the authors have judged there is sufficient overlap between learningoutcomes from multiple courses that they are listed together in one line in the table; for example,Outcome 6 is about working on a team, and the respective learning outcomes for the threecapstone courses and the VIP course are all listed in that cell. Regarding formal learningoutcomes, ME4723 has seven in rows 1-7. ECE 4723 and ECE 4823 have nine in rows 3,5,6,10-13, and VIP has three in rows 6,8,9. An outcome that is customary but not formal in the ECEcapstones is indicated by an “C”. An informal learning outcome implied by the nature of theproject is indicated by “EA” in the
simple activity, the IM, to be implemented. Theeducator scaffolded conversation around inclusion in multiple ways. She was also aware of herlimitations, as someone who was interested in promoting inclusion in her course, but did nothave enough previous experience with creating inclusive spaces. From here on, we will refer tothe educator as Dr. YH.Scaffolding a DEI InterventionIn an effort to virtually build a community in Fall of 2020 that addressed issues in diversity,equity and inclusion, the Dr. YH took the following actions in an Engineering Design course: 1. Included a DEI statement in the syllabus. This statement was discussed in the first class session. This action was a part of a new department wide effort to
boxes g. Electronic course information (e.g. syllabus, handouts) h. Electronic grading/feedback i. Electronic rubrics j. Other k. None of the above 13. What tips or best practices for LMS use would you share with early career faculty members? Open response. 14. What other types of technology do you use in the classroom? Check all that apply. a. Clickers b. PollEverywhere c. Videos d. Presentations via tablet with handwriting input e. Simulations f. Other g. None of the above 15. What tips or best practices for technology in the classroom would you share with early career faculty? Open Response. 16. Do you
&M University. He is also the Assistant Lab Director at the Sketch Recognition Lab.Dr. Shawna Thomas, Texas A&M University Dr. Thomas is an Instructional Assistant Professor in the Department of Computer Science and Engineer- ing at Texas A&M University. She is a member of the Engineering Education Faculty in the Institute for Engineering Education & Innovation at Texas A&M. She enjoys project-based learning and incorporat- ing active learning techniques in all her courses. She received her Ph.D. from Texas A&M University in 2010, focusing on developing robotic motion planning algorithms and applying them to computational biology problems including protein folding. She continued this work as
reasoningskills through problem-based learning activities, and examine complex issues that educators facein the 21st century. The class is taught in an active-learning, technology-enriched classroom.Throughout the semester, students work closely in small groups to discuss a variety of readings,videos, and learning tools, ranging from the writings of Paulo Freire to the PBS documentary“Digital Media: New Learners of the 21st Century.” As deliverables for the course, each studentcreates a learner-centered syllabus for a course in their discipline, a teaching philosophystatement inspired by their own values and experiences, and a problem-based learning project.After each session, students blog and tweet about the readings, individual assignments
contribute tothe development of self-efficacy, CS/M identity, and sense of belonging?" As discussed below,current research efforts are focusing on the effects of the seminars and the mentoring aspect ofthe program.The second main research theme of the project is the effect of early CS exposure (courseworkand career awareness in freshman year) on computer science and math majors. For CS/MScholars, the early exposure to CS consists of the first-quarter CS seminar, a first course inprogramming the following quarter, and program events where career opportunities in CS arediscussed. Because many incoming freshmen have limited knowledge of CS, early CS exposuremay attract such students to CS. Evidence from our previous S-STEM project indicates that
experiments and assignments. This sample and the teamingenvironment reflected several similarities to the first-year engineering programs for which thisinstrument was intended. An email introducing and containing a link to the online survey wassent to all students during the final days of the course. Response rates were extremely low (≈7%) due to the timing of the survey and lack of in-class announcements. However, the fewresults that were obtained demonstrated that students would identify others outside of their teamsand even their sections, through use of the free-response questions.The final version of the survey consisted of a cover letter describing the purpose of the researchand data collection, a prompt asking the students to indicate all
. They also write their recommended scores on a grid on a whiteboard,so grading consistency can be verified.Assessment in DesignProject work is graded collaboratively by the Design course instructors, the facilitators, and thedesign panel members. Most project work is graded as a team, and individual contributions areassessed by instructors and facilitators to increase or decrease an individual learner’s grade, asshown in Figure 1.Figure 1: Assessment summary from Design course syllabus, Spring, 2019, shows point allocationfor various deliverables and contributions to project completion.A new question was recently developed by a faculty member: “On the IRE Scale, how would yourate the team’s performance, relative to it’s potential?” (IRE Score
notcomplete the surveys, and provided feedback that the self-efficacy section was too long and thestudy will have an attrition challenge with participants. In the next iteration, the number of self-efficacy questions was reduced as shown in Table 3. The questions were selected based on thecriteria that they aligned to traditional research competencies that students acquire throughresearch programs [44], the research items covered as many items of the research self-efficacysubscales from the literature, and the items covered the primary research activities on theINSuRE class syllabus illustrated in Table 1.An anonymous online pre-survey was distributed to students the week before the first researchactivity of the INSuRE class. Although there were a
learning.CASCADE utilizes design exercises and experiences along with cascaded peer-mentoring. TheCASCADE objectives include infusion of the design process for freshman through senior; anincrease of retention of engineering undergraduate students; and an increase in the 6-yearengineering undergraduate graduation rate. Strategies to achieve these objectives includeincorporation of design experience into targeted engineering courses at all levels; creation of aninnovative cascaded mentoring program; and linkage to the TAMUK Javelina InnovationLaboratory (JIL). This paper provides demographic data, retention and graduation rates.Preliminary numbers showing growth in retention and graduation rates are provided. The resultsdemonstrated that the design
activity. One weekprior to the start of the process, a topic was created and made available on Blackboard for studentsto study before the class. Likewise, the course syllabus was posted on Blackboard at the same time.An announcement was also created to prompt student’s attention about the activities posted onBlackboard and particularly, the grading policy for the course. In the grading policy, 50% of theentire semester grade was allocated to class project assessment, this includes; student presentation,discussion session, write-up, PowerPoint, and project defense. Through a weekly announcement,the professor provided pre-knowledge on what to be discussed in the sub-sequent classes on theBlackboard.Step II: Form the GroupStudents were given the
journal articles published under her name. She has also written in thegenre of science fiction, and published books in the body-mind-spirit genre about her empathic encounterswith horses. She has taught courses in Nanotechnology Ethics and Policy; Gender Issues and Ethics in theNew Reproductive Technologies; Religion and Technology; STS & Engineering Practice; The Engineer,Ethics, and Professional Responsibility; STS and the Frankenstein Myth. Rosalyn regularly incorporatesmindfulness practices into her engineering school courses. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2018 Dimensions of Diversity in Engineering: What We Can Learn from STSIntroductionThe challenge of increasing diversity in engineering is
entrepreneurship principles for the betterment of the community they were part of. Thedetailed structure of the class comprising the study of affordable and accessible engineering throughsocial innovations, frugal engineering, and servant leadership is discussed in the next section.2. Description of course: Thesis, synopsis, course material, and executionUsing global cases of social innovations, students in the class researched and studied the fundamentalsof (1) engineering social innovations, (2) globalization, and (3) leadership for effective implementationand success. The course also involved a project component where students were challenged for theidentification of project statements and developing a well-thought-out engineering solution for
reproduce if we do notimplement inclusive practices with a critical lens.In relation to looking at barriers to inclusion, studying the phenomenon of power in thesociological sense has also gained traction in engineering education. Moving in this direction iscritical as we seek to understand barriers to diversity, equity, and inclusion. In this paper, we usethe Oxford Dictionary definition of power: the capacity or ability to direct or influence thebehavior of others or the course of events. Power as a phenomenon has become particularlyimportant in understanding structural systems of oppression that prevent major change to happenin diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts. This paper looks to explore Patricia Hill Collins’framework of domains of
have been culturally and traditionally dominated by white males, inthe past they didn’t feel like there was a need to consider DEI issues, hence, engineeringprograms are perpetuating a dominant culture and a way of teaching engineering that does notrecognize nor value cultural, racial, linguistic, and economic differences.Q3: Alisha Sarang-SieminskiDrawing on the idea of stereotype threat developed by Claude Steele [21] and others, I thinkabout how students’ ability to thrive and succeed is impacted by their sense of belonging. Myown work in the classroom falls into 2 categories. First is what I think of as creating anaccessible and inclusive environment. This comes through intentional work in the course designand syllabus to make the
any ladders.Analytical Commentary on Insights for FacultySophie begins her narrative by highlighting both race and gender as most salient, but articulates gender asmore salient to her experience in engineering. Much of Sophie’s experience could be understood ashighlighting gendered microaggressions or other gendered cultural norms, such as mansplaining orstereotyping women as incapable. These might be seen as small, isolated incidents (i.e., the definition ofmicroaggression) but they are memorable, build up over time to have a collective impact, and affect herparticipation on her team and in the course. She has her own names for these phenomena, for example,“explaining things I never asked for” is a succinct description of mansplaining. After
engineering a residentialenvironment as well as intentional peer and faculty interaction to promote their success in thefield of engineering, has exceeded expectations in retaining undergraduate women from the firstto third year in engineering. Aspects of this community include students residing together on afloor of the co-educational hall dedicated to first-year students in engineering, access to aDouglass Peer Academic Leader (PAL) in-residence, support from a female engineering graduatestudent mentor, enrollment in the Douglass first-year course Knowledge and Power: Issues inWomen’s Leadership, and interaction with faculty from all engineering disciplines during theirlinked course Introduction to Engineering which is taught by a full-time faculty
believed these experiences helpedthem become well-rounded individuals. Their experiences have contributed to the developmentof skills that will be beneficial in the work world. For example, both students credited theirexperiences to improving their interpersonal skills with diverse groups, and Isabel explicitlyexpressed that meticulous time management is crucial for her to manage her course work andout-of-class activities.Curricular ContextTheme 3 - Deep learning experiences increase student engagement: When the participantswere asked to recall when they considered engineering fun, the participants provided examplesthat were tied to deep learning experiences. For this study, deep learning experiences are definedas experiences of instructional
this perspective comes from social studyresearch that working with real-world and narrative problems might help these students toembrace better their identity as engineers.To facilitate such collaboration, we (three faculty members from engineering and socialsciences) will teach concurrent courses for students in our disciplines, and bring our studentstogether during the semester to interact and collaborate. Each team of 4 students will beassigned a case study to discuss, collect data on, and analyze by conducting what-if analysis.Since our engineering course will be an elective course, it may attract predominantly URM andwomen students because of this case-study focus. Our desire to incorporate state-of-the-art toolsmay also facilitate the
project was an even mix between process and product, observing the students surprise at the amount of process needed to successfully launch a commercial product. The nature of the project was very interdisciplinary crossing between, software, firmware and hardware. • Credit hours and accreditation requirement: The course was two semesters for 8 credit hours. Several learning outcomes and educational objectives were documented in the course syllabus and assessment data was collected and monitored. • Outcome evaluation: Overall this was considered a “good” outcome in that the company is now selling commercial products. Reflecting on the project there was an obvious disconnect between the industry
, results, and conclusion) are highlighted to provide students with a framework fortheir final reports. Guidelines for the research paper (Appendix C) and examples of past researchreports (from the previous FIRE course) are made available to the students for reference.Additionally, a list of online resources offering tips for creating attractive and effective researchposters and academic writing guides are distributed to further aid in preparing the finaldeliverables. The research poster session is held during the last lecture session. Teams present theirsemester’s work in a 7 minute presentation, followed by 3 minutes of Q&A with the audience.Team research reports are also collected at this last meeting. In 2015, the poster session was
ATLAS. This instrumentwas used in the present study to assess preferred learning strategies. An important advantage ofATLAS is that it is simple to administer and is currently the generally-accepted method formeasuring learning strategy preferences.18 Three distinct learning strategy groups wereidentified: Navigators, Problem Solvers, and Engagers.26 Navigators plan their learning andfocus on completing the necessary activities to achieve their goals. Order and structure areimportant to these learners, who tend to be logical, objective, and perfectionists. They want clearobjectives and expectations at the beginning of a course and in advance of activities, such as inan explicit and detailed syllabus and precisely defined assignments and
. Female students link engineering to problem solving,analytical thinking, innovative, creative thinking, decision making, and teamwork. Notsurprisingly, the top reason listed (75% of respondents) for their friends not choosing engineeringas their field of study was their lack of confidence in their abilities, especially in courses requiringadvanced knowledge of mathematics. Past research shows that for female students, the key driversof subject choice are how good they are at the subject (94%), the subject syllabus (92%) andwhether the subject teacher is knowledgeable (91%) while 87% believe whether the subject teacheris fun is also important. Some respondents mentioned that the female students were intimidated by the sheernumber of men
course of three calendar years. Included inthis initiative was the launch of the Mentoring Fellows Program, a student-led and faculty-advised group tasked with researching and improving mentorship at the college level. During thefirst year of the Mentoring Improvement Initiative, the fellows were tasked with focusing on therelationship between a graduate student and their committee head or primary advisor.The College of Engineering Mentoring Fellows, composed of three graduate students, twofaculty, and one staff member, prioritized analyzing existing data collected by the graduateStudent Experience in the Research University (gradSERU) online service. The fellowsrecognized that while most students stated they were content with the relationship
diversity education into first year is an obviousimmediately achievable goal, with many programs already incorporating some elements atpresent. Another obvious place to include a deep dive in diversity would be in courses on ethicsand professionalism, or in co-op and capstone experiences. Here lessons about diversity can bereadily applied in workplace contexts, and future employers can readily build on educationaloutcomes in industry training settings. Finally, we must seriously consider how to build diversityeducation into the engineering core courses. One easily implementable way to do this would beto identify and highlight achievers in the field who are members of diverse groups. Studentscould do this as an assignment initially, and profiles
guidelines for engagement with individuals and evaluation of the quality of students’ work [1]. Examples of these would be a course syllabus, a program of study, student- teacher contracts, and/or any documented and written course expectations.2. Null Curriculum: Entails what is not taught in the classroom due to mandates from higher authorities, a teacher’s lack of knowledge, or deeply ingrained assumptions and biases [1]. An example of this would be teachers and school systems choosing not to explain certain concepts (e.g., Christopher Columbus’s colonization methods toward many native peoples when he "discovered" the Americas).3. Hidden Curriculum: Represents the unwritten, unofficial, and often unintended lessons, values, and
undergraduate engi- neering education and developing strategies to support engineering students in resisting oppression within institutions of higher education and society more broadly.Dr. Stephen Secules, Florida International University Stephen is an Assistant Professor Engineering and Computing Education at Florida International Univer- sity. He has a prior academic and professional background in engineering, having worked professionally as an acoustical engineer. He has taught a number of courses on engineering and education, including courses on engineering design, systems in society, and learning theories. Stephen’s research interests include equity, culture, and the sociocultural dimensions of engineering education
students, and students with demonstrated need for academic support during the transition from high school to college.Jennie S. Popp Ph.D., University of Arkansas Jennie Popp, Ph.D. is a Professor of Agricultural Economics and the Associate Dean of the Honors Col- lege at University of Arkansas. As Associate Dean, Dr. Popp contributes to student success initiatives through the management of Honors College study abroad and research grant programs, the facilitation of the development of service learning and other new courses, promotion of undergraduate research activ- ities and in contributions to the PTG and Honors College Path programs. Her research has focused on identification and implementation of sustainable
projects an 8% increase for employmentin STEM occupations from 2019 to 2029 (BLS, 2020). The educators and the community need tomake sure that the education system is keeping students ahead of the curve and providingemployers access to a world-class workforce.The National Aeronautics and Space Administration Office of STEM Engagement (NASA -OSTEM) strives to increase K-12 involvement in NASA projects, enhance higher education,support underrepresented and underserved communities, strengthen online education, and boostNASA’s contribution to informal education. In an effort to increase K-12 involvement andawareness about NASA STEM topics, a NASA-sponsored project was carried out at FloridaAtlantic University (FAU) to bring NASA-STEM contents to