Deweyan Pragmatist who focuses on student-centered teaching and reflection. She also is working toward making higher education a more socially just and safe space for all and uses writing, speaking, and research to address each of these important aspects of her academic career. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 Research Initiation in Engineering Formation: Literature Review and Research Plan for an Engineering Specific Empathy ScaleAbstract Engineers are societal caregivers, solving problems for the betterment of society.However, both practitioners and students of engineering struggle to make concrete connectionsbetween empathy and their role as engineers. While
sciences and engineering at VT during 2007-19. This site has 100+ alumni to date. He also led an NSF/Research Experiences for Teachers (RET) site on interdisciplinary water research during 2016-19 with 30+ alumni. He also led an NSF-funded cybersecurity education project and served as a co-PI on two International Research Experiences for Students (IRES) projects funded by the NSF. He has published over 90 papers in peer-reviewed journals and conferences.Dr. Landon Todd Marston, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State UniversityDr. Christopher P. Vanags, Vanderbilt UniversityDr. Kang Xia, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Kang Xia received her Ph.D. from the University of Wisconsin-Madison (1997), M.S
stoplight,” therebyusing his personal interest in public health to broaden his coworkers’ thinking and potentially theimpact of their research. Likewise, undergraduate Gretchen’s interest in mechanical engineeringinspired Kate to think more broadly about her research. Kate told Gretchen about a grantproposal she was writing about alloys. She detailed, in technical terms, the experiments shewanted to include, then added, “I’m trying to make it relevant to the navy” to improve theproposal’s chances of being funded. Gretchen asked whether the navy could use these alloys tobuild engine turbines. Kate answered thoughtfully, “Yes. Oh, maybe I’ll put a picture of a shipturbine blade in there.” While the PI was thinking about lab-based specifics, the
scaf-fold on prior learning and experiences, addressing a continuum of lower level to higher levelthinking and deep learning as appropriate for the curriculum. Reflection essays, class discussion,individual and group projects/products, peer review and feedback, or other types of activities willbe used to measure learner progress on the learning objectives, and to provide timely and rele-vant feedback to both the instructor and learner. This information will be used by both the in-structor and learner(s) to guide decision making and engagement in bio-inspired design. Rubricsor grading guidelines will be created for each formative assessment to ensure they align with theproject goals and learning objectives. Summative assessment will occur at
the historical focus on individual problem solving, it is traditionally expected that everyteam member strives toward excellence in all skills involved in the project, such as writing, oralpresentation, and analysis. However, in the collaborative problem-solving paradigm, there is ageneral understanding that students can contribute to projects in a way that is more tailored totheir skills and interests. By promoting this approach, a culture of collaboration, innovation andinclusion in engineering education and the profession is fostered. This shift in focus should alsoinclude flexible teaching and evaluation methods that recognize that different students learndifferently [14].A Theory of Change for an Engineering DepartmentThe NSF
University of Minnesota. Her research explores issues of professional development for K-12 science teachers, with a focus on beginning teachers and implementation of integrated STEM learning environments. She has received over $30 million in federal and state grants and published over 80 peer-reviewed journal articles and book chapters. She is a former board member of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching and past president of the Association for Science Teacher Education.Dr. Christopher Barr, Rice University Rice University Office of Assessment and Evaluation of STEM Programs led by Dr. Barr is the Direc- tor of Assessment and Evaluation of STEM Programs at Rice University. He has been an evaluator and
-incomebackgrounds were more likely to hold a fixed mindset than their peers from high-incomebackgrounds. They determined that a fixed mindset among students from low-incomebackgrounds is more incapacitating to a student’s academic performance than a fixed mindsetamong students from high-income backgrounds. On the other hand, a growth mindset amongstudents from low-income backgrounds is more empowering to a student’s academicperformance than a growth mindset among students from high-income backgrounds (Claro et al.,2016). This finding is highly relevant to the STARS program since students from low-incomebackgrounds are targeted. Potentially, persistence in engineering could be linked to a student’smindset. Students displaying growth mindset motivated goal
informationnetwork helpful for dealing with coursework and internships. He writes: “The impacts of this network on self-efficacy, and intentions found their origins in the Maine experience, and that the other side of this new network is that it helps the students to feel supported as they leave their old lives behind and begin to assume new roles in society. Prior to Suffolk, they had no engineering network at all. The contrast in the students' personal networks pre- and post-Maine was sharp. Although these students were provided with support during the year such as faculty availability, small class sizes, study groups, and weekly pizza parties, the Maine experience was both effective and essential for
College Academic PerformanceCohort 2 is in their second semester of college as of this writing. Thus, there is limited collegeacademic performance and retention data for them. However, we examined several objectiveindicators that were available: fall semester math course grades, fall semester grade pointaverage, and spring semester enrollment at the University. The data are shown in Table 2 for thebridges combined and in Tables 5a and 5b for the programs separately. Math course letter gradeswere converted to a numeric grade point equivalent using a standard scale (e.g., A = 4.0, F =0.0). Students who participated in the math-intensive summer bridge programs earnedstatistically higher grades, by half a letter grade, in their first college math
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.Dr. Keith D. Hjelmstad, Arizona State University Keith D. Hjelmstad is Professor of Civil Engineering in the School of Sustainable Engineering and the Built Environment at Arizona State University.Prof. James A. Middleton, Arizona State University James A. Middleton is Professor of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering and
Summer Research Program 2018During the first year’s REU program, the students were given tasks to find and read relevantliterature and software tutorials, to write scripts in R on machine learning algorithms, and to writea script for basic algorithms in Python to control smart cars.Although not defined formally as designed activities, the students’ projects aimed to developcyber-attack, detection, and mitigation models on transportation networks for connected andautonomous vehicles. Tasks contained methods to be applied such as attack tree modeling(graphical) and the development of traffic and communication simulations. These tasks included: 1. Students used ARC-IT architecture (i.e. connected vehicles, (U.S. DOT, 2018)) to import defined
networkanalysis results. The table below is based on the analysis of five interviews; 3 HBCU and 2 PWI. PWI HBCU Mentors: Peers Mentors: Faculty Interviewer: Do you have a mentor at the Female Speaker: I have professors that are readily university? available that I can go to and get help if need be. Would I specifically call them my mentor? No. Male Speaker: A mentor? Not specifically. They are available for help. B(another senior
participants to bond more easily and interact in peer mentoring to advise each other,both in research and lesson plan development. Finally, research in functional materials is aparticular strength of the host institution with substantial laboratory and educational resourcesand accomplished FMMI researchers working in close collaboration in shared, non-partitionedspaces.Program activities were designed to be synergistic and helpful to participants in producing theirposters and lesson plans. These included an authentic research project guided by faculty andtheir associated graduate students, a course in the fundamentals of materials science, weeklylesson plan seminars, group research meetings and brown bag lunches. A variety of follow-upactivities
because itis founded on evidence. Past studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of the DesignHeuristics method in concept generation [25, 32]. We have also conducted preliminary studieson the use of Design Heuristics in the engineering classroom, and demonstrated its effectivenessas pedagogy 23, 24. This research base provides a solid foundation for our project because it isbased on peer-reviewed, scientific studies. Many professions have advocated the use ofevidence-based practice in their fields, including medicine, psychology, and education 41-44. Ourproposed project provides an application of “evidence-based practice” in engineering educationto benefit students by providing state-of-the-art education in design
attendconferences or work on developing manuscripts felt that their experience helped toimprove their communication skills.8) All of the students interviewed indicated that the URE was a worthwhile experience,and the majority of the students would recommend that their peers participate in an URE.From these results, it can be inferred that having an URE will usually help participants todevelop their applied engineering skills. There is also an opportunity to greatly impactcommunication skills through an URE, particularly if the URE encouraged and promotesstudents to participate in conferences and the development of manuscripts. For studentsinterested in graduate school, the URE does offer participants a chance to experience theresearch process, as well as a
experiments, results, and problems encountered; 2) students had the opportunity toreceive feedback on their work from other faculty mentors in the program (not just their ownassigned mentor) in a collegial, low-pressure setting and to observe how scientific dialogueoccurs in practice; and 3) students had the opportunity to learn about what their peers in theprogram are working on, with the goal of giving them a better appreciation for the breadth ofresearch in the field. An additional goal of the check-ins was for the crosstalk that occurredbetween mentors (and students) in these group meetings also helped students to see commonthreads between the various research approaches and scales among the different projects.At the conclusion of the 10-week REU
Education, 2014 Paper ID #8971 Mechanical Engineering from Cornell University in 1994. His research interests include product family and product platform design, product dissection, multidisciplinary design optimization (MDO), and addi- tive manufacturing, and he has published over 250 peer-reviewed papers to date. He teaches courses on Product Family Design, Concurrent Engineering, Mechanical Systems Design, and Product Dissection, and he serves as the Director of the Product Realization Minor in the College of Engineering. He is a recipient of the ASEE Fred Merryfield Design Award and a NSF Career Award. He has received
discussion,and peer group studying. Prior to taking the pre-survey, students were informed about theproject with an introductory paragraph on the survey and asked to agree or disagree toparticipate—in other words, participation was optional. All but two students opted to participate.After the survey data were collected at the end of the course, the project evaluator conductedtwo-sample t-tests on all of the survey questions to determine whether the students’ perception oflearning was higher at the end of the semester than it was at the beginning. Within-subjects testscould not be used because of the anonymity of the data. The two-sample t-tests produced thefollowing results on the outcomes questions of interest and the learning style questions
student retention. To helpensure sustainability, we also introduced a community of practice with faculty teachingintroductory programming courses across the six California State Universities. We organized ouralliance using a collective impact model allowing for the flexibility of learning from our peers asfaculty colleagues, while developing customized curriculum with the same goal – servingmarginalized students better.This work is influenced by research documenting that early computer science courses can bechallenging for all students [2, 3]. And, while there are nationwide efforts to tackle the creation ofentry ways into computing that are welcoming for all students (CS4All), specific intention andfocus on the experience of historically
ability to control. Consequently, they intend to share their knowledge with other students. However, Tohidinia and Mosakhani [8] contend that knowledge sharing involves both knowledge collection and donation. Entering students seem more willing to collect knowledge from their peers than donate to it. This situation represents a potential opportunity to target learning activities towards building knowledge sharing skills and confidence. Survey of the motivational design of the assignments themselves. Keller [9-12] contends that effective instruction employs a motivational design that (1) attracts and maintains student attention; (2) demonstrates the relevance of what students learn to important personal goals
question proved to be the leastcomprehensive, with 6 respondents (21%) indicating “other”. Two of these write-in options maybe added to the revised survey before national dissemination (do not assess; in-class discussions).No individuals in this survey were using an individual standardized assessment method; the lackof use of these instruments may point to the fact that many instructors may not be aware of theseinstruments, perhaps due to lack of formal training in ethics instruction. Alternatively, it mayreflect the difficulty of creating standardized instruments that measure students’ knowledgeand/or attitudes toward macroethical issues and/or a lack of faculty confidence in suchinstruments. These results related to assessment merit a deeper
Page 23.342.7approach. 6During the community service learning process, students were required to learn the strategiesfor creative problem solving, and participate in self-evaluation surveys and mini-tests toevaluate their knowledge on the introduced strategies and their performance in applying theknowledge. They were also required to write community service project journals to record theirthinking and reflection on the process of identifying problems, obtaining relevant knowledge,and creating innovative solutions. Finally, they were required to present and report theirprojects. At the end of the community service, they were required to submit
- sylvania State University. Her research focuses on decision analysis and design theory applied to im- provement of products and systems. She has co-authored over 200 peer-reviewed papers to date and received several best paper awards. She has been also a National Research Council-US AFRL Summer Faculty Fellow of the Human Effectiveness Directorate for 2002, 2003 and 2004, and a Fulbright Scholar (2010-2011).Dr. Conrad Tucker, Pennsylvania State University, University ParkProf. Timothy W. Simpson, Pennsylvania State University, University ParkDr. Sarah E Zappe, Pennsylvania State University, University Park Dr. Sarah E. Zappe is director of Assessment and Instructional Support in the Leonhard Center for the Enhancement of
. Astin’s Inputs-Environment-Outcome (IEO) conceptual framework [80] examines how inputs(characteristics and attributes (Learner Profile), i.e., prior experiences, socioeconomic background,race, gender, etc.) and the learning environment (formal and informal elements of the institution,i.e., curriculum, teaching pedagogical approaches, extracurricular activities, and prior learningexperiences such as internships, and interactions with peers and faculty) influence studentoutcomes. Outcomes are defined as the changes that occur in the student because of theireducational experiences, such as learning and developmental outcomes. The majority of theliterature that uses the IEO conceptual model has focused on the examination of student success asa
, students in online learning conditions performed better than those receiving face-to-face instruction.”4 However, subsequent meta-analysis argued that the report does not pertain tofully online, semester-length college courses.25 Indeed, as compared to the traditional face-to-face environment, some evidence suggests that not all learners do as well in fully online courses.Using course grade and course completion as dependent variables, a study based on researchconducted at community and technical colleges across the state of Washington (on 500,000course enrollments and 41,000 students) found that in aggregate online students performed worsethan their peers, with some student groups—especially males, younger students, students withlower levels
, Orientation, Introduction to Mechanical Engi- neering, Introduction to Engineering Communication and Report Writing, Introduction to Matlab and plotting. The communication and plotting modules were incorporated to sup- port the laboratory project reporting during the first part of the semester. • Weeks 4-9 (10/5/15 -- 11/9/15): Brief introduction to Mechanical Engineering Principles. These concepts included position, velocity, acceleration, load paths, forces, moments, stress, strain, and thermo-fluid conservation laws. The presentation of theory was intro- ductory and conceptual using examples. • Week 10-12 (11/16/15 – 11/23/15): The Engineering design process, with a focus on De- sign
, and co-director of the Social Informatics area of the Center for Human-Computer Interaction. Design – and in particular, participatory approaches to design – has shaped his approach to teaching and research: he is a registered architect in California, studies the prac- tices of design, has created tools for design collaboration, and is an award-winning designer. He has edited two books, authored numerous peer-reviewed publications, designed award-winning interactive STEM exhibits, chaired the ACM SigCHI Design subcommittee, organized the ACM Design of Inter- active Systems (”DIS”) conference in 2014, and is the director of the ACM DIS Conference Steering Committee. Before coming to Virginia Tech, he was a research
voluntarily joined the course. While in the training, they also had theopportunity to ask questions and create a community with other peers and faculty. This furthermotivated them to practice outside of class. Informed consent forms were collected on day oneand, after the students completed their final assessment and exit survey, a gift card and t-shirtwere issued to those with no more than two absences at the end of the course. The finalassessment was the PSVT-R [7] also. In Fall 2016, the authors invested in the videos created bySorby [5] which discussed the workbook chapter’s content. The videos were presented at thebeginning of each chapter and the authors learned from the students that this material facilitatedthe understanding of the modules to
mindset that adds to the way we as a team approachideas. From my perspective, the additional perspective of technology and engineering adds adifferent lens for problem-solving and innovation. This lens has been used for writing papers,adding ideas to conversations, and a different way to look at data. All the ideas, being welcomedby the research team, and getting constructive feedback to improve the ideas to reflect the greatergoals of the M3 project."Rebecca"One of my greatest strengths I believe as an anthropologist is my keen ability to observe andhighlight nuances often overlooked in research inquiries or projects. Anthropology, with itsdiverse range of skills, theories, and focuses, equips me, particularly as a cultural anthropologist,to be