general and engineering in particular almostexclusively focus on students of color. In effect, this research studies socioeconomic class bystudying race and ethnicity. While many low-income and first-generation students are also racialand ethnic minorities, not all students of color experience socioeconomic inequality. Moreover,this analytic frame misses many poor white students who do not have access to the samenetworks and support groups as do their peers who are students of color (e.g. MinorityEngineering Programs, Society of Hispanic Professional Engineers, National Society of BlackEngineers, etc.).In fact, socioeconomic inequalities, as distinct from racial and ethnic inequalities, rarely appearin definitions of diversity in STEM education
use of experimental centric pedagogy in a variety of settings and through multiple methods; the most frequent use was in a laboratory course with peers. Table 2 Use of ADB in Varied Instructional Modalities* Pre Post Instructional Modality Median % Used Median % Used Response 6+ times Response 6+ times Location/Setting of Use In a class setting Never 10 3 times
conducted on how female and low-income students function in a cooperative,learner-based studio environment and advance understanding of the role different levels ofmentorship (peer, senior members, assistants, and faculty) play in the PWS model and how itimpacts the performance of female members of the cohorts. By working together in a team-basedenvironment, the PWS built strong connections among the PWS scholar cohort. The PWS isdeveloping well-rounded students who are afforded hands-on experiences, and the opportunity towork in multi-disciplinary team environments and gain exposure to real-life projects in computerscience, engineering, and technology. These experiences, combined with professionaldevelopment and mentorship, will enable scholars to
, and Computer Science at the University of California,Berkeley.A substantial amount of research over many years has examined undergraduate student retentionand why students leave STEM majors.12-17 Challenges that prevent minority students’ persistencein STEM education include: lack of role models, inequitable academic preparation, lack of astudent peer group, and inadequate advising.18-21 For minority students or first generation collegestudents in the physical sciences at the nation’s research institutions, the lack of role models andinadequate advising are particularly problematic since few faculty members are of an URM.21Minority students, often the only URM in their department, are generally isolated and not likelyto seek out advice or
build each case is described, and examples are shared.Background on the Pedagogical Ninjas ProgramPedagogical Ninjas ProgramThe Pedagogical Ninjas program was designed to combine faculty development aroundpedagogical risk-taking with the dissemination of ideas through an additive innovation cycle [4].Inspiration for the program came from previous efforts to create and sustain faculty-led learningcommunities [5], that are willing to take risks [4] in pedagogical transformation [6, 7, 8]. Anadditive innovation cycle (Figure 1) is a community-driven process wherein participants engageeach other in the following four steps: (1) becoming inspired by the local community andinstructor peers, (2) sharing and learning about pedagogical ideas and
STEM education. The actstates that “The defense of this Nation depends upon the mastery of modern techniques developedfrom complex scientific principles. It depends as well upon the discovery and development ofnew principles, new techniques, and new knowledge”.2 Published literature supports the idea that individuals with ADHD may have the potential tobe more creative than their peers. 3-7 Their ability to be spontaneous and divergent thinkersallows them to take more risks. As they naturally tend to think outside of the box, individualswith ADHD have the potential to offer unexpected solutions to complex problems.8 Despite thesignificant contribution ADHD students can make, they often struggle in traditional educationalenvironments. Mainly
Prepare progress reports; interview graduate students; (3) Summarize -Describe the principal findings of the project present findings to mentors and both the technical -List the attributes of a successful graduate student peers; offer feedback on and experiential improving the program; co- aspects of the -Describe a typical workday for a graduate student author technical papers and research -Write an effective technical paper or report reports; prepare research posters; experience
. Perry Samson at the University of Michigan. This site will be sustainable into the futuresince it is now a company that grew out of a 2005 NSF CCLI grant. LectureTools converts PDFor PPT files to JPG files, which are stored in the “cloud” (a high capacity server). The instructorcan use a mouse pointer or tablet writer to write or do calculations directly on his/her JPG slideswith the script appearing immediately on the screens of all students, each of who has their ownaccount (cost is $15/semester). This account also gives them access to their own slide file set foreach class with immediate access to both the instructor slide set and their own slide set anytimeand anywhere. They can also take notes in a box on their own slide file and interact
faculty develop the strategiesand understanding of the learning process that are necessary to develop a learning centered-classroom. 28 The program offered introductory and advanced workshops and on-goingbiweekly meetings. It reflected the belief that faculty needed to experience learning in alearning-centered atmosphere and to practice in their own classrooms with continued supportfrom their peers. Evaluation data showed that workshop participants that attend the regularmeetings (i. e., became part of the community) reported changes is classroom behavior; whilethose that did not reported marginal or no progress in implementing changes in their classrooms,emphasizing the importance of continued interactions.An extensive bioengineering curriculum
graduate schooltraining, which socializes future faculty toward traditional definitions of scholarship that remaindeeply held: that scholars create new knowledge for academic communities and demonstratetheir expertise in writing; and that discovery research is harder and requires more expertise thanteaching or service [24] [37]. In a multi-institutional case study of reform institutions, O’Mearacharacterized a “culture war” around decisions about promotion to full professor, wrapped up ininstitutional self-image and values of prestige associated with traditional scholarship [24].Ratcheting up of research expectations to improve rankings has also been identified as asignificant barrier [37]. In addition, CAOs have reported difficulty in expanding
for the Arizona Department of Education, a research scientist for the Center for Research on Education in Science, Mathematics, Engineering and Technology (CRESMET), and an evaluator for several NSF projects. His first research strand concentrates on the relationship between educational policy and STEM education. His second research strand focuses on studying STEM classroom interactions and subsequent effects on student understanding. He is a co- developer of the Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol (RTOP) and his work has been cited more than 1800 times and his publications have been published in multiple peer-reviewed journals such as Science Education and the Journal of Research in Science Teaching.Prof
, Engineering and Technology (CRESMET), and an evaluator for several NSF projects. His first research strand concentrates on the relationship between educational policy and STEM education. His second research strand focuses on studying STEM classroom interactions and subsequent effects on student understanding. He is a co- developer of the Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol (RTOP) and his work has been cited more than 2200 times and he has been published in multiple peer-reviewed journals such as Science Education and the Journal of Research in Science Teaching.Prof. Keith D. Hjelmstad, Arizona State University Keith D. Hjelmstad is President’s Professor of Civil Engineering in the School of Sustainable Engineering
peer reviewed conference proceedings articles in these areas. He has B.S. in ME, and both M.S. and Ph.D. in IE. He is a member of ASEE, INFORMS, and a senior member of IIE.Dr. Michael Johnson, Texas A&M University Dr. Michael D. Johnson is an associate professor in the Department of Engineering Technology and In- dustrial Distribution at Texas A&M University. Prior to joining the faculty at Texas A&M, he was a senior product development engineer at the 3M Corporate Research Laboratory in St. Paul, Minnesota. He received his B.S. in mechanical engineering from Michigan State University and his S.M. and Ph.D. from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Dr. Johnson’s research focuses on design tools
Observation Protocol (RTOP) and his work has been cited more than 2200 times and he has been published in multiple peer-reviewed journals such as Science Education and the Journal of Research in Science Teaching.Dr. Lindy Hamilton Mayled, Arizona State University Lindy Hamilton Mayled is the Director of Instructional Effectiveness for the Fulton Schools of Engineer- ing at Arizona State University. She has a PhD in Psychology of Learning, Education, and Technology and her research and areas of interest are in improving educational outcomes for STEM students through the integration of active learning and technology-enabled frequent feedback.Prof. Robert J Culbertson, Arizona State University Robert J. Culbertson is an
Paper ID #8959Design Heuristics: An Evidence-Based tool to improve innovationDr. Seda Yilmaz, Iowa State University Dr. Yilmaz is an Assistant Professor of Industrial Design who teaches design studios and lecture courses on developing creativity and research skills. For her research, she investigates design approaches and ideation, creative processes, and cross-disciplinary design team dynamics. She is the author of more than 20 peer-reviewed journals and conference proceedings. She also serves on review, advisory, and scientific boards of various journals and conferences. Her current research focuses on identifying
Paper ID #8808Investigating impacts on the ideation flexibility of engineersDr. Seda Yilmaz, Iowa State University is an Assistant Professor of Industrial Design who teaches design studios and lecture courses on devel- oping creativity and research skills. For her research, she investigates design approaches and ideation, ethnography in design, foundations of innovation, creative processes, and cross-disciplinary design team dynamics. She is the author of more than 20 peer-reviewed journals and conference proceedings. She also serves on review, advisory, and scientific boards of various journals and conferences. Her
sustainability, and July focused on convertingproject course implementation to online formats (due to COVID-19).In order to facilitate effective sharing of information and peer learning, SUMMIT-P uses twoprotocols during project meetings that provide a format for effective and fruitful discussion. Thetwo protocols, Descriptive Consultancy protocol and Success Analysis with Reflective Questionsprotocol, have historically been applied in the K-12 education community [4]. The DescriptiveConsultancy protocol [5], originally developed by Nancy Mohr and revised by Connie Parrishand Susan Taylor in August 2013, was modified by McDonnough and Henschel [6] and has beenadapted for this project to help presenters think more expansively about a particular
Survey of StudentEngagement from 2006, many of the external obstacles facing NT students contribute to thedifficulty for them to develop peer relationships (study groups) at the university [14].Those students that are employed and seeking degree completion identified many professionalbarriers exhibited in the workplace including a lack of tuition reimbursement, competing timemanagement schedules, and/or lack of release time from work. Also institutional barriersinhibiting access to higher education included the high cost of tuition, and diminishedaffordability [4]. Furthermore, because adult learners (NTs) also face the barriers of simplycoping with previously outlined external factors add additional stress and/or anxiety arecompounded by the
village in Sri Lankawith social constraints. Students present their recommendations to their peers in class with richtechnical and non-technical discussions.ENGR 351 Community-Based Participatory Engineering ApprenticeshipTo support the increasing number of students who wish to work with both local and internationalcommunities, and develop their capabilities related to the social and environmental context ofengineering practice, a new elective was offered in Spring 2019 with the explicit intent tofacilitate student exposure to and ability to work in a participatory way with community groups.The course facilitates connections between the theories and praxis of engineering that aresocially and environmentally just. Students develop skills of
helpful to pay for school, but the Alumni dinner is invaluable. It really helped give me the confidence I needed to see peers not much older than me succeed, and to hear their advice on how to get there. And now as an alumnus who is succeeding in the field of engineering, I love being able to share what I’ve learned and help others.”A unique opportunity ASPIRE funding provided was the ability for students to attendprofessional conferences. Nearly half of the students (49%) responded in the survey that theytook advantage of ASPIRE funds to attend conferences. Students selected the following benefitsof attending a conference: a) received advice on applying for jobs (73%) b) received advice for interviewing
member of the Women in Engineering ProActive Network (WEPAN). Her research interests include the educational climate for students in science and engineering, and gender and race stratification in education and the workforce.Dr. Cara Margherio, University of Washington Cara Margherio is the Senior Research Associate at the UW Center for Evaluation & Research for STEM Equity (CERSE). Cara serves as project manager for program evaluation on several NSF- and NIH-funded projects. Her research interests include community cultural wealth, counterspaces, peer mentoring, and institutional change.Dr. Julia M. Williams, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology Dr. Julia M. Williams is Interim Dean of Cross-Cutting Programs and
., and B.S.in chemical and biochemical engineering from Rutgers University. Prior to joining Rowan Uni- versity he was a professor at Manhattan College.Dr. Mariano Javier Savelski, Rowan University Professor and Chair of Chemical EngineeringDr. Parth Bhavsar, Rowan University Parth Bhavsar, is an assistant professor in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at Rowan University. His research interests include Intelligent Transportation System (ITS), Connected, Autonomous, and connected-automated Vehicle Technologies, Transportation Data Analytics, and Alter- native Fuel Vehicles. Dr. Bhavsar has published in peer reviewed journals such as the Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technology
manufacturing challenges, including life cycle engineering methods, manufacturing process performance modeling, and sustainable engineering education. He has received funding from DOE, NIST, NSF, the U.S. Army, the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Oregon Metals Initiative, and industry. His work has appeared in more than 60 peer-reviewed proceedings and journal articles. Page 26.398.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2015Constructionist Learning for Environmentally Responsible Design Page 26.398.2 Constructionist Learning for Environmentally
. Students are also exposed to Chinese culture through all kinds of arranged cultureexchange activities. In this paper we will discuss some of the experience that we gained fromorganizing this international research program over the past 3 years. Some of the planning,logistics, procedures and outcomes will be described and analyzed based on the results fromprogram survey. Some suggestions to keep the sustainability of the program will be alsoprovided. This type of information will be useful for peers who seek to run a similar program.Application and RecruitingThe program ran for eight weeks in each summer of 2010-2012, starting in middle of May andending in early July. Nine months before the program started, the NSF IRES flyer was preparedand was
Paper ID #9042Prof. Ram Pendyala, Arizona State University Ram M. Pendyala is a Professor of Transportation Systems in the School of Sustainable Engineering and the Built Environment at Arizona State University. His expertise lies in the study of human activity-travel behavior, sustainable mobility strategies, public transportation systems, and the land use, travel, energy, and air quality impacts of a wide range of transportation policies and technologies. Dr. Pendyala has conducted more than $5 million in sponsored research and published nearly 100 peer-reviewed journal articles and book chapters. He serves on the editorial boards of a number of journals including Transporta- tion, Transport Reviews, Journal of
, and selection 54 Complete an individual programming project 49 Debug a program 46 Be persistent in solving computing problems 45 Work collaboratively with peers on computing problems 44 Create, test, and refine computational artifacts 43 Be familiar with different branches of computer science 42 Identify computer science terminology 41 Recognize, define, and analyze computational problems 40 Table 2: Items earning at least 40 votes in asynchronous feedback.3 ResultsWe identified six major themes as
. Dr. Thole has published over 180 peer-reviewed archival journal and conference papers and advised over 50 theses and dissertations. She founded the Experimental and Computational Convection Laboratory (ExCCL) which is a Pratt and Whitney Center of Excellence for heat transfer. She is a Fellow of ASME and serves as the Chair of the Board of Directors for the International Gas Turbine Institute, as the Chair of the ASME - ME Department Head Executive Committee, as a member of the Vision 2030 Committee, and as the Chair of ASME’s Committee on Honors. She has been recognized by the U.S. White House Champion of Change for recruitment efforts in STEM and by Penn State’s Rosemary Schraer Mentoring Award.Ms. Melissa
, team assignment, peer evaluation, and active and collaborative teaching methods and his team received Best Paper awards from the Journal of Engineering Education in 2008 and 2011 and from the IEEE Transactions on Education in 2011 and 2015. Dr. Ohland is an ABET Program Evaluator for ASEE and was the 2002–2006 President of Tau Beta Pi. He is a Fellow of the ASEE and IEEE. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2017 Catalyzing a Research Agenda for Enhancing Engineering Education through Institutional CollaborationsAbstractTo augment the extensive engineering education research that has been done over the pastdecades, greater opportunities are needed for
using theframework, and the results of the coding from that iteration were compared and discussed. Tofacilitate the content analysis of the standards documents, a detailed coding protocol for eachiteration of the Framework was developed. This coding protocol was designed to guide theresearch team and to ensure the validity and reliability of the review process. The iterations ofthe framework were also evaluated through peer and expert review at key times within the designresearch cycles. These research cycles will be described in detail in each of the correspondingsections below.Presentation of the FrameworkWe begin by presenting the Framework for Quality K-12 Engineering Education in its final form.The Framework has 12 key indicators that
required the team to ad-dress a particular decision situation, develop a model for solving their identified problem, applythe model to the specific case, and write a memo to a “client” that detailed the team’s results andrecommended decision for the case. The group parts were assigned on a Thursday and due inclass the following Tuesday. Students worked in the same three person group for all three E-MEAs which were a required part of the student’s course grade. These were graded by the in-structor. The comparison group was only assigned traditional homework assignments and somein class group problems (text book style) related to the course concepts.Grading rubrics were developed for each to ensure consistency and to verify that students metthe key