grapplingof personal identity and existence in society.The acknowledgment and processing of these perspectives will be explored below using aframework of researcher racial and cultural positionality [4]. This framework will assist inpresenting the “seen, unseen, and unforeseen” [4] by beginning to (1) research the self, (2)research the self in relation to others, (3) engage in reflection and representation, and (4) shiftfrom self to system. By exploring these facets of our own personal perspective or positionality,we can begin to more adequately investigate the phenomenon of interest involving individualswith different life experiences than our own.Thoughts of Positionality from a Qualitative ResearcherA key practice that was established early in my
engineering outreach. They have a strong commitment toconducting lifelong STEM learning, as well as an audience that spans from pre-school through adult.Engineers and engineering societies looking to expand their outreach activities should explore and growthis partnership opportunity. This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant Number DRL-1657593. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.
individual space.In the group space, usually in the classroom, the instructor can focus on more complex learningoutcomes. The time and activities in the classroom can be broken down into several phases: (1)opening minutes: connecting with pre-class preparation, keeping students accountable for thepreparation, and clarifying misconceptions, (2) middle of class: conducting the group activity,and (3) the closing minutes: debriefing the activity and reflection on issues and learning.The post-group activity can be a continuation or extension of the in-class activity. The reader isreferred to Talbert’s book (2017) for an extensive discussion of the history and pedagogy offlipped learning as well as detailed instructions about how to design lessons and
make it more universal. The modified instrument, as shown in Appendix B, has notbeen validated. All the questionnaire items will be translated to Vietnamese by translators. The NOEinstrument will be distributed to the Vietnamese faculty when they sign the consent form.Participants will have ample time to complete the written questionnaire. This will allowparticipants to reflect on their NOE views in-depth and relate the responses to their current workexperiences. After receiving the written responses, we will conduct a follow-up interview withthe participants to elaborate on their written responses to generate as much detail as possible ontheir NOE views. All NOE items will be used in conjunction with individual follow-upinterviews with
onbreadboards. Play Laser Chess/Maze to become comfortable with tracing beam paths. Figure 3. Laser based games (Laser ChessTM and Laser MazeTM) teach reflection, beam splitting, ray tracing and the visualization of optical paths. Day 2 Begin the day with lessons on lasers, explaining the concept of “Light Amplification byStimulated Emission of Radiation” and talk about the construction of different types of lasers.Introduce the concept of fiber optics and teach refraction and total internal reflection. Do demosof laser light being carried through a fiber. Let the students get hands on with the fibers andlaser sources. Review previous day’s electrical topics. Present new
in this area,E=Has serious deficiencies in this area which are detrimental to students. Four factors were identified which had the potential to show improvement of satisfactionscores due to the course redesign. The noted factors of the EOC survey instrument were:Response 12 (TP): the lectures were well organized, stimulating and up to dateResponse 13 (TP): the objectives of the course were clearly stated and explained during the lecturesResponse 15 (CP): the supplemental material was adequately detailed and positively contributed to the learning experienceResponse 18 (CP): the scope of the material covered in the lectures was reasonable in the amount and reflected high standards
and qualities of engineers include creativity, leadership, teamwork, andinnovative thought [29-30]. Further, the nature of engineering work requires that engineers beaware of the social and cultural states of the world and the ways in which their work affectsothers [30]. Therefore, exploring leadership behaviors of engineers would lend insight into thenature of leadership within the engineering context. The primary research question in this studyis as follows: Which leadership styles are experienced by current engineers? This exploratorystudy reflects an effort to describe the lived experiences of current engineers and theirobservations of leaders with whom they have worked.Methodology The purpose and research question associated with
Engineering Education, 2019 Evaluating the Impact of Ethics Instruction on Student AwarenessAbstractEngineers must frequently make decisions during their careers without understanding orknowing the full set of consequences. These decisions can have unintended or harmful results.Therefore, it is imperative that engineers consider the ethical dimensions of their decisions whileworking to satisfy their employer’s interests even if these decisions conflict with theirorganization’s objectives or their own goals. Engineers have a responsibility to uphold a level ofethical standards that produces trust in not only their organization but also in their profession.Students entering the workforce must reflect the same level of ethical standards
model, numerous learning style models have beenproposed such as those found in [10], [11], and [12]. All models classify students according toscales that are defined based on the way learners receive and process information. The FSLMincorporates some elements of the Myers-Briggs [12] model and Kolb’s [11] experientiallearning model. The main reasoning for its selection in the DLMS evaluation is that it focuses onaspects of learning that are significant in engineering education.The FSLM consists of four dimensions, each with two contrasting learning styles. These fourdimensions (and their associated contrasting learning styles) are: Processing (Active/Reflective);Perception (Sensing/Intuitive); Input (Visual/Verbal); and Understanding
useful, relevant and responsive to their learning needs. Recruitment of focus groupparticipants consisted of a class wide email by the instructor inviting the students to participate inthe study. In all, a total of six half-hour long focus group interviews were utilized to facilitatecollective reflection and dialogue by providing students opportunities to openly discuss theirlearning experiences with fellow peers. The number of students participating in a given focusgroup ranged between 6-8 and all focus groups sessions were audio recorded for transcription andanalysis purposes. The dynamic nature of the focus group method stimulated conversation amongthe students and sparked conversations centered on their unique experiences related to the
use the well-known expectancy-value achievement model by Ecclesand Wigfield [14]. In this model, students’ self-schemata (which we frame in this study as STEMidentity) predicts their expectations of success (which we frame as students’ self-efficacy), whichpredicts their achievement-related choices (which we frame as STEM career aspirations as wellas STEM study strategies), as do the subjective values students assign a task (which we frame asperceived STEM degree utility).In this model, self-efficacy can be viewed as the extent to which students believe they arecapable of learning and understanding academic topics, as well as successfully performingacademic tasks to their own standards [15]. Career aspirations in STEM reflect the extent
-studies in part two. Thesequestions serve two related ends: first, causing participants to reflect on their own knowledge andexperience, fostering critical thinking skills in relation to and better retention of contents; second,for research purposes, to better understand what users know and think about concepts and contentsrelated to ethics, technology, and society (Fig. 5 and Fig. 6).Fig. 5 Free-response questions about ethicsFig. 6 Free-response questions about cultureQuestions appearing at the end of the case studies concern each of the ten steps of the case-studyprocedure outlined in chapter two of Global Engineering Ethics (Fig. 7 and Fig. 8).Fig. 7 Step one of the case-study procedureFig. 8 Step two of the case-study procedureVersus
connections among them. This simple act helps learners tobetter appreciate the broad set of skills and knowledge needed to be a good engineer, which inturn seems to motivate and guide more purposeful study. Further, this reflective activityincreases both understanding and retention.The Seven C’s were introduced to students in several Mechanics of Materials classes during arecent multi-year study on assessment methods [1]. Though they were not a formal part of thestudy itself, it was observed that the C’s played a key role in student success. (The only C notemphasized in these classes was Collaboration, though it could have been.) By introducing theselearning categories early and referring to them often, they gradually became part of thevocabulary
diverse resources, libraries can also provide materials for diversityworkshops offered to employees, which is also a form of direct support because the selection ofculturally diverse material aims to shape collective understanding of diversity and inclusion.Libraries can generate quantitative data to demonstrate support for teaching and research.Collection DevelopmentPerhaps the most important issue here is whether the collection development policies andpractices reflect the strategic (research, teaching, community development) goals of theuniversity. Both public and academic libraries have been adding language about diversity, whichmay conflict with cultural and political motivation to exclude some resources in some areasspecifically with
the teachers and theuniversity students related to engineering habits of mind, awareness of engineering as aprofessional field, and development of self-efficacy related to engineering topics.Data Collected: Consistent with a mixed methods approach [28], we collected multiple sources ofdata to evaluate our RET program, including a STEM teaching efficacy instrument, video andobservation of classroom lessons, engineering-based lesson plans, laboratory notebooks, and anend-of-summer reflection survey.STEM teaching and learning outcomes were measured by the MISO T-STEM instrument, whichwas intended to characterize participant attitudes on entering the program and identify areas ofgrowth due to program participation. The T-STEM (Teacher Efficacy
. One of the degree plans is housed in a traditional engineering department whereidentity formation is implicit (i.e., our control group), and one is a non-traditional engineeringdegree plan where identity development is explicit. Therefore, before describing the researchmethods used to assess engineering identity development of students in both departments, whatfollows is a summary of how the departments implicitly and explicitly attempt to developengineering identity, particularly in the non-traditional department.Engineering identity development in the non-traditional department is scaffolded across a rangeof activities, from project-based learning and reflection to the deliberate study of other identities,such as entrepreneur and leader. By
fields of Business and Law [11,12,13]. Behavioral Ethicsintegrates traditional educational approaches to ethics with personal and professional reflection(i.e. what moral foundations do we and our profession bring to an ethical decision), anexploration of biases and stumbling blocks (e.g., loss aversion, ethical fading, etc.), and anemphasis on developing effective habits and strategies to avoid these decision making pitfalls.These insights can be applied at both the personal and institutional level.This paper describes the introduction of Behavioral Ethics into an engineering curriculum, usingethical questions centered on risk and public safety as an example. To guide the identification oflearning outcomes, a Behavioral Ethics rubric was
., Schlossberg’sTransition Theory) for examining the high school-to-college transition of engineering studentsfrom underrepresented racial/ethnic groups. The subsequent sections examine the developmentof a codebook grounded in Schlossberg's Transition Theory [5] to articulate the categoriesthrough which African American and Hispanic/Latinx students’ reflect on their own transitioninto college. The theory and codebook provided language that illuminates the coping strategiesand supports that underrepresented minority engineering students use during their first year incollege.Theorizing the Transition from High School to CollegeWe use the sociocultural perspective to theoretically frame our exploration of the transition fromhigh school to college. The sociocultural
courses in biology, chemistry, calculus, electriccircuits, and computer programming.To date, 3 cohorts of students have engaged with this module. Each cohort is between 50 and 75students and composed of primarily third-year Biomedical Engineering students, with a smallfraction of Electrical Engineering students. The demographics reflect those of the BiomedicalEngineering program, with approximately 55% female students. Initial results indicate thatstudents develop significant ability to work with MATLAB as an engineering tool and enterfollowing coursework better prepared to apply prerequisite materials. In a qualitative self-assessment, participating students indicated that the activities could have better reinforced lecturecontent, but
been in practice for a very long time.Scholars have defined Problem-based learning as minds-on, hands-on, focused, experientiallearning (Wilkerson & Gijselaers, 1996). Instructors are considered to serve as problem solvingcolleagues assigned with the responsibility of promoting interest and enthusiasm for learning Aproblem-based curriculum is significantly different from the traditional discipline centeredcurriculum (Woods, 1994). Instructors are also encouraged to act as cognitive coaches who can nurture anenvironment that can support open inquiry (Barrows, 2000). It is important that the aims andobjectives of problem-based learning are reflected in every aspect of the learning environmentcreated. Problem-based curriculum should
uploading an artifact, selecting acategory, writing a description, listing skills, tagging teammates, and creating a hashtag. Eachstudent in the REU Program created ten posts during the ten-week program. They documentedresearch deliverables, professional and technical sessions, field trips, conferences, or anyexperience that helped them grow professionally.The purposes of e-portfolios were for developmental (learning/reflection), showcase(professional/career), assessment (summative), and institutional (academic) purposes [6]. TheREU Program focused on the developmental and showcase uses. For developmental purposes,their e-portfolios promoted transferable skills, lifelong learning, and reflective thinking [7]. Asone student shared, “The
quality of thinking by systematic metacognitive reflection on their thinking.Paul and Elder make CT operational by practice in three dimensions of critical thinking [3].These are a set of elements of thought (purpose, questions, data and information, etc.), a set ofintellectual standards (clarity, accuracy, precision, relevance, depth, etc.), and a set of intellectualvirtues of a good critical thinker (intellectual humility, courage, honesty, empathy, etc.) We positthat the elements of thought map onto the intellectual content of a typical refereed journal article(and to other forms of research communications as well). Furthermore, we maintain that theintellectual standards map onto review standards used for refereed journals (and other writing
of Ethics, it is clearthat the Code highly reflects deontological theory; i.e., it consists of a series of doctrines thatengineers must follow, with intrinsic morality tied to each behavior. In other words, the Code ofEthics can be seen as a reflection of an engineer’s duty to society.A difference from this dominate theoretical approach can be seen to emerge in the review of 108articles and conference papers on macroethical education in engineering. Articles were reviewedand sorted based on the three main “families” of ethical theory: utilitarianism, deontology, andvirtue ethics. This review showed that explicit reference to these three families of theoryoccurred in 41 of the 108 articles reviewed – 14 predominately noted utilitarianism
multiple times (n > 3).The codes were developed based on semantic reflections of the explicit content, such assentences that started with “engineering is”. Labels were identified for inferred concepts aboutengineering (e.g. “I am anxious about taking the higher-level math courses required”). Theconcepts then were examined and collated together into broader patterns of meaning. Thesepatterns of meaning were checked against the greater data to refine into specific themes.ResultsStudents’ preconceptions of engineering centered around five key thematic areas: knowledge,perception, impact, method and performance (Figure 1). Students often eluded to contentknowledge that they expected engineers to know. Oftentimes this was more broadly addressed
suggested eight learning outcomes thatwould meet the ABET program criteria [2]. To determine which outcomes are currently beingtaught in the UO laboratory, the curricula from six different universities were analyzed using theeight Chemical Process Safety learning outcomes recommended by SAChE [3]. The results ofthat study showed that process safety is minimally covered in the UO laboratory, and that otheraspects of process safety are not covered even at the wider curriculum level.To create the necessary curricular change, a recent model suggests four different strategies canbe used independently or collectively to create change in higher education. These strategies are1. policy, 2. shared vision, 3. curriculum and pedagogy, and 4. reflective
engage with them in professional skill workshops. The S2S program aims to prepare both graduate and undergraduate students with the professional skills they will need after graduation regardless of if they are going into industry or academia. A multitude of skills are covered in the program that address the knowledge, skills, and abilities necessary for the Tshaped engineer, including but not limited to: information literacy, leadership, teamwork, diversity, time and project management, reflection scientific/written/oral communication, writing, career services, entrepreneurial mindset, and public speaking. To
importance of understanding the career preparation process, researchersshould endeavor to develop knowledge that reflects the lived experiences of individuals makingdecisions about their future careers.In engineering education, two gaps in the literature currently limit the extent to which careerresearch reflects individuals’ lived experiences. First, existing studies in engineering educationresearch often make assumptions of what “counts” as an engineering career. Typically, onlypositions in industry or academia in engineering sectors are counted towards retention. Second,studies often treat career decision-making as a logical, cognitive process, ignoring the pervasiveinfluences of personal identities and belonging. The proposed study has
) 2. Brainstorm infrastructure and layout of google site 3. Work on marketing flyers 4. Flow diagram Team Final version of 1. Presentation (~5 min) on work so far – include how each puzzle works with puzzle Reflection of your fabricated object AND two other groups fabricated objects committee’s 2. Work on final version of puzzle (chosen by flow committee), 3D printed object, and progress and how 3 3D printed object
other industries. The data does notdifferentiate the type of incidents that contribute to the injury rate. A low overall injury rate doesnot necessarily correlate to the degree of lab safety since some injuries will be unrelated to labwork. Actual injury rate is likely higher than the data shows because it only includes reportedinjuries above a certain threshold. The BLS tracks causes of days away of work by industry, butit groups education with health services, which is the industry with the highest injury rate.Therefore, no analysis was done on whether the types of injuries at universities could reflect labaccidents.Generally, city governments are responsible for building and fire safety. Other alternative safetymonitors are found at the
understand how to model the equation but also have to solve the equation. Cui,Rebello, and Bennett [31] mentioned that students need prompting and scaffolding to connect thecalculus knowledge with physics problems, so we did it with some success, reflected in thequantitative results shown in Figure 2.Figure 2 shows that there is a large percentage of students with a high score in the qualitativeindicator (44% of students had a score greater than 80%). From those, the spread in scores forthe quantitative part is large. On the other hand, all students who have a high score in thequantitative part (i.e., greater than 80%) also have a high score in the conceptual part. It seemsthat it is required to have a strong conceptual understanding, but this is