). Page 15.1096.1411. F. W. Taylor, The Principles of Scientific Management, New York: Harper & Brothers.12. B. E. Ashforth, S. H. Harrison and K. G. Corley, “Identification in Organizations: An Examination ofFour Fundamental Questions”, Journal of Management, 34(3), 325 (2008).13. F. A. Mael and B. E. Ashforth, “Alumni and Their Alma Mater: A Partial Test of the ReformulatedModel of Organizational Identification”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13, 103 (1992).14. R. Van Dick, J. Ullrich and P. A. Tissington, “Working under a Black Cloud: How to SustainOrganizational Identification after a Merger “,British Journal of Management, 17(S1), S69 (2006).15. C. Bullis and B. Bach, “Socialization Turning Points: An Examination of Change in
Paper ID #8899The Influence of Student-Faculty Interactions on Post-Graduation Intentionsin a Research Experience for Undergraduates (REU) Program: A Case StudyDr. Lisa Massi, University of Central Florida Dr. Lisa Massi is the Director of Operations Analysis for Accreditation, Assessment, & Data Adminis- tration in the College of Engineering & Computer Science at the University of Central Florida. She is Co-PI of a NSF-funded S-STEM program and program evaluator for an NSF-funded REU program. Her research interests include factors that impact student persistence and career development in the STEM fields.Caitlyn R
establish remarkable footprints and make an impact that matters. Simul- taneously, Daniel is the CEO of an EdTech start-up. Prior to joining FIU, Daniel had worked in Dubai for the ministry of Education as a STEM Educator and Lead Instructor. Previous work experience was in the United Kingdom (as an assistant Lead manager) and Nigeria. To date, he has co-authored 2 journal articles, authored 2 Physics textbooks, held many leadership roles and won several awards (one notable one is a World Bank award).Dr. Bruk T. Berhane, Florida International University Dr. Bruk T. Berhane received his bachelorˆa C™s degree in electrical engineering from the University of Maryland in 2003. He then completed a masterˆa C™s degree in
- Revised (SLQ- R) Sherman, D. K., 2021 Frontiers in Doctoral USA Perceived Adapted Zimet et al. (1988) Ortosky, L., Psychology students Social support Leong, S., Kello, C., & Hegarty, M. (2021) Smith, A. B., 2021 Nurse education Doctoral USA Collaboration DevelopedUmberfield, E., today students of LeadershipGranner, J. R., and Innovation Harris, M., in MentoringLiestenfeltz, B
design in mid-curricula engineering sciences courses.References[1] A. Rugarcia, R. M. Felder, D. R. Woods, and J. E. Stice, “The future of engineering education: Part 1. A vision for a new century,” Chem Eng Educ, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 16–25, 2000.[2] J. Trapani and K. Hale, “Higher Education in Science and Engineering. Science & Engineering Indicators 2022. NSB-2022-3.,” National Science Foundation, 2022.[3] T. Litzinger, L. R. Lattuca, R. Hadgraft, and W. Newstetter, “Engineering education and the development of expertise,” Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 100, no. 1, pp. 123–150, 2011.[4] E. Crawley, J. Malmqvist, S. Ostlund, D. Brodeur, and K. Edstrom, “Rethinking engineering education
] International Engineering Alliance, "Graduate Attributes and Professional Competencies," Jun. 21, 2021. Accessed: Oct. 14, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.ieagreements.org/assets/Uploads/IEA-Graduate-Attributesand-Professional- Competencies-2021.1-Sept-2021.pdf[2] D. H. Jonassen, Learning to solve problems: A handbook for designing problem-solving learning environments. Routledge, 2010.[3] S. Sheppard, K. Macatangay, A. Colby, W. M. Sullivan, and L. S. Shulman, Educating engineers: Designing for the future of the field, 1st ed. San Francisco, CA, USA: Jossey-Bass, 2009.[4] H. S. Lee, A. Pallant, S. Pryputniewicz, T. Lord, M. Mulholland, and O. L. Liu, "Automated text scoring and real‐time adjustable
theappropriateness of the feedback and manage the emotions (or affect) that comes withreceiving negative or constructive feedback. Carless and Boud argue that achieving thesethree feedback literacy competencies maximise the chances that a student will actually learnfrom feedback and take action.While there have been attempts to build on this model in the feedback literacy space, such asChong’s Ecological Perspective [7] and Wongvorachan et al.’s digital feedback literacymodel [8], these models have not become as ubiquitous as the original feedback literacymodel. An investigation of these models find that they tend to take the original feedbackliteracy model in its entirety and add additional dimensions and information too it (see Figure2). These dimensions
Sacramento State and by an NSF grant (DUE # 2235774).References [1] C. L. Dym, A. M. Agogino, O. Eris, D. D. Frey, and L. J. Leifer, “Engineering design thinking, teaching, and learning”, J. Eng. Educ., vol. 94, no. 1, pp. 103–120, Jan. 2005. [2] S. Rodenbusch, et al. “Early engagement in course-based research increases graduation rates and completion of science, engineering, and mathematics degrees,” CBE life sciences education, vol. 15, 2016, doi:10.1187/cbe.16-03-0117. [3] C. D. Wilson, J. A. Taylor, S. M. Kowalski, and J. Carlson, “The relative effects and equity of inquiry-based and commonplace science teaching on students’ knowledge, reasoning, and argumentation,” J. Res. Sci. Teach., 2009. [4] C. Katie, M. Blum Michelle, M. Julie, and S.-C. C
, alsohave the highest level of tentativeness in the LIWC analysis, suggesting that their leadership isexpressed in a way that invites others’ input. The GCA analysis (Fig. 4) is somewhat at variancewith the others, suggesting that S1 and S4 are the greater participators. The overallresponsiveness scores are very similar for all team members, but the social impact scorescorroborate the observation that S3 seems disempowered.Figure 3 - Scores for each member (S1-S4) of each team for each of the three LIWC constructs. Theresults for team F22 are skewed by S4’s very small number of utterances.Figure 4 - Scores for each member (S1-S4) of each team for each of the three GCA constructs. The resultsfor team F22 are skewed by S4’s very small number of
Hispanic Higher Education, 20(3), 297-312. 4. Prescott, A., Coupland, M., Angelini, M., & Schuck, S. (2020). Making School Maths Engaging: The Maths Inside Project. Springer. 5. Tobias, S. (1998). Anxiety and mathematics. Harvard Education Review, 50, 63–70. 6. Balfanz, R., & Byrnes, V. (2006). Closing the mathematics achievement gap in high- poverty middle schools. J. of Ed. for Students Placed at Risk, 11(2), 143-159. 7. Rowan‐Kenyon, H. T., Swan, A. K., & Creager, M. F. (2012). Social cognitive factors, support, and engagement: early adolescents’ math interests as precursors to choice of career. The Career Development Quarterly, 60(1), 2-15. 8. Bursal, M., & Paznokas, L. (2006). Mathematics
adjusted because the liftload cells counteract the moment created by the drag force due to how static mechanics work. Figure 4. Statics Diagram for Drag Moment AdjustmentUsing the statics illustrated in Figure 4, the adjustments for the lift force are [3]: 𝐹 , , =𝐹 , , −𝐹 ∗ (Eq. 1) 𝐹 , , =𝐹 , , +𝐹 ∗ (Eq. 2)Physical Models The test bed used is a Hampton H-6910 Wind tunnel with a test section of 23 in x 8 in x 8in. A cylinder of 1.6 in diameter was tested, as shown in Figure 5, to find the lift and drag forcesacting on a 3D-printed body. This was done with a flow velocity of 10.06 m/s, considering laminarflow conditions
without anyexternal disturbances, allowing them to take the test in a restful setting. All the sessions werevideo recorded with the consent of the participants.As each student completed the ping pong ball launcher design task, s/he was video recordedvia zoom. The recording of each participant was then analyzed using the following sequence: a) transcription – verbal protocol was transcribed from the video recording. b) segmentation – dividing the verbal textual data into units that could be coded using a pre-defined coding scheme [21]; c) coding – using the previously established coding scheme, a design step was chosen to describe each student’s “location” in the overall design process [22].Two coders coded each segment of the
dynamics in the construction sector. It is also vital toexplore how team performance and project outcomes are affected by the personalities ofindividuals and the entire team.References[1] M. S. Prewett, A. A. Walvoord, F. R. Stilson, M. E. Rossi, and M. T. Brannick, “The Team Personality-Team Performance Relationship Revisited: The Impact of Criterion Choice, Pattern of Workflow, and Method of Aggregation,” Human Performance, 22(4), 273–296, 2009.[2] E. Salas, E., D. L. Reyes, and A. L. Woods, “The Assessment of Team Performance: Observations and Needs,” Innovative Assessment of Collaboration, 21-36, 2017.[3] J. E. Mathieu, J. R. Hollenbeck, D. V. Knippenberg, and D. R. Ilgen, “A Century of Work Teams in the
Academies Press, 2018.Stevens and colleagues (2008, p.365)[12] J. Worell, Encyclopedia of women and gender, two-volume set: Sex similarities anddifferences and the impact of society on gender. Academic Press, 2001.[13] H. B. Carlone and A. Johnson, "Understanding the science experiences of successful womenof color: Science identity as an analytic lens," Journal of Research in Science Teaching: TheOfficial Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, vol. 44, no. 8, pp.1187-1218, 2007[14] S. Stryker and P. J. Burke, "THE PAST, PRESENT, AND FUTURE OFAN IDENTITYTHEORY."[15] S. L. Rodriguez, C. Lu, and M. Bartlett, "Engineering identity development: A review of thehigher education literature," International journal of education
1 27 1 29 The findings suggests that the extent of reflection on a topic that a PST was curious aboutdid not meaningfully relate to any changes in their teaching confidence. This is similar to thefindings from Antink-Meyer et al.’s study wherein science curiosity and change in confidencewas not observed. Reflection on content and the development of content knowledge was notdirect. In addition to examining journaling strategies that sustain connectedness to inquiry andengineering design experiences, future studies are needed that examine whether disciplinarydomains imbue associations between types of curiosity and types of epistemic engagement.RQ2 What is the nature of the engineering curiosity expressed
increasing access to like-minded peers through astructured cohort-based community of practice. Participating in this program allows engineeringfaculty to add value to the promotion and tenure portfolio that goes beyond curriculumdevelopment to disseminating best teaching practices. Given that today engineering facultymembers are even more accountable for the effectiveness of their teaching and learningactivities, this is an ideal program to incentivize engineering faculty in a way that enhances theirpromotion and publishing opportunities.To learn more, visit www.PurduePD.com.6. Appendix7. References[1] L. Bosman and S. Fernhaber, "Applying authentic learning through cultivation of the entrepreneurial mindset in the engineering classroom
represented (particularly those on the outer fringes of thenetwork who have fewer connections), as those only connected through workshop attendancecan no longer be used in this calculation. However, five of node 29’s direct connections (a totalof 21 other nodes) were made and maintained through workshops alone, and so node 29’snetwork is still decreased when workshop connections are no longer considered.Also of note are the two relatively large nodes who did not use workshops in developing theirEM: 11 and 3. When connections made through workshops were removed from the network, thebetweenness of node 3 dropped a small amount from 0.08 to 0.06. However, node 3 describedtheir experience at KEEN conferences (their most influential resource) as
a team decided they’d like to obtain help from a Consultant, they could choose one to“hire” from a list of all the Consultants in the program. The team reached out to them to schedule amutually agreeable time and were asked to give advance notice on the topic(s) with which they want toreceive help. The Project Consultants were trained such that their interaction was much more aligned withfocused instruction that enabled a team to solve their own problem, as opposed to directly solving theproblem for the team. In this way, working with a Project Consultant served to both advance the progressof the team’s project and reinforce the broader course outcome of increased engineering self-efficacy. A small amount of internal funding was
Paper ID #37223Work in Progress: Developing an Engineering Community ina FablabJan Edwards Jan L. Edwards is an Associate Professor of Engineering at the College of Lake County in Illinois. She received her Bachelor’s and Master’s degree in Materials Science and Engineering at Michigan Technological University. Ms. Edwards teaches general engineering courses, manages outreach initiatives and the CLC Baxter Innovation Lab at the community college. She is also serving as the Principal Investigator on the college’s NSF S-STEM grant, Building an Academic Community of Engineering Scholars.ANA PIZANO Ana K. Pizano
flexibility on how studentsidentify and integrate assets in the learning and engineering design process. To this end,instructor professional development on ABP is needed. As a next step, we will explore ways toengage other instructors in ABP-related training and identify a broader set of ABPs.References[1] A. Haverkamp, M. Bothwell, D. Montfort, and Q.-L. Driskill, “Calling for a Paradigm Shift in the Study of Gender in Engineering Education,” Studies in Engineering Education, vol. 1, no. 2, p. 55, Feb. 2021.[2] A. E. Trauth, J. M. Buckley, T. N. Barnes, J. Enszer, S. Rooney, and R. Davidson, “Adjusting the Lens: Comparison of Focus Group and Cross-Sectional Survey Data in Identifying and Addressing Issues of Diversity
all students enrolled in TEC116 during this period, and persistence data on other majorswould provide useful information for other programs within the department.References1. Sorby, S. A. (2005). Assessment of a" new and improved" course for the development of 3-D spatial skills. The Engineering Design Graphics Journal, 69(3).2. Veurink, N. L., Hamlin, A. J., Kampe, J. C. M., Sorby, S. A., Blasko, D. G., Holliday-Darr, K. A., Trich Kremer, J. D., Abe Harris, L. V., Connolly, P. E., Sadowski, M. A., Harris, K. S., Brus, C. P., Boyle, L. N., Study, N. E., & Knott, T. W. (2009). Enhancing visualization skills-improving options and success (EnVİSIONS) of engineering and technology students. The Engineering Design Graphics
are a few limitations of the potential study. As an exploratory research study, thestatistical significance of the analysis has limitations compared to the ones from theexplanatory research study. Another limitation is that it needs to be further tested in differentsettings such as large, commercial, educational applications, or across different institutions tomake the results more generalizable. Furthermore, the study doesn’t account for differentconfounding variables such as ethnicity, academic performance, or race. Moreover, this studycould be enhanced by including the process data such as classroom observations for students’engagement [28] , or other students analytics data.References[1] D. Yang and S. J. Baldwin, “Using technology to
Computational Toolsin Engineering Education: A Case Study on the Use of Mathcad,” Chemical EngineeringEducation (CEE), vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 180–87, 1997.[10]H. S. Fogler and N. M. Gurmen, “Aspen Plus™ Workshop for Reaction Engineeringand Design,” p. 44.[11]N. Chonacky and D. Winch, “Maple, Mathematica, and Matlab: the 3M’s withoutthe tape,” Computing in Science Engineering, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 8–16, Jan. 2005, doi:10.1109/MCSE.2005.18.[12]P. V. V. R. Rao, G. Durga Prasad, and S. Dileep Kumar Varma, “PedagogicalApproach to Teach the Modeling of Power Electronic Converters,” in 2014 IEEE SixthInternational Conference on Technology for Education, Dec. 2014, pp. 191–192. doi:10.1109/T4E.2014.59
Kristine Denman is the Director of the New Mexico Statistical Analysis Center. She has over 20 years of experience in both applied research and program evaluation, including multiple evaluation projects focused on STEM internship experiences. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2023An Engineering/Computer Science Project with Community Service FocusAbstract:This conference paper informs about a S-STEM (Scholarships in STEM) project awarded to theUniversity of New Mexico (UNM) School of Engineering (SOE). This NSF project is focused onproviding scholarships to students with merit who also demonstrate financial need. Thisparticular NSF project was focused on professional development activities as well as
approach (Social Psychology Series). Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1996.[6] M. H. Davis, "Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 113-126, 1983.[7] J. C. Oxley, The moral dimensions of empathy: Limits and applications in ethical theory and practice. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011.[8] S. Baron-Cohen, The science of evil: On empathy and the origins of cruelty. New York: Basic Books, 2011.[9] M. A. Clark, M. M. Robertson, and S. Young, "“I feel your pain”: A critical review of organizational research on empathy," Journal of Organizational Behavior, vol. 40, no. 2, pp. 166-192
agricultural production systems," Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems, pp. 285-295, 2008, doi: 10.1017/S174217050700213X.[7] S. L. Wang, R. A. Hoppe, T. Hertz and S. Xu, "USDA-ERS #302: Farm labor, human capital, and agricultural productivity in the United States," 2022.[8] G. L. Baldwin, V. Booth Womack, S. E. LaRose, C. S. Stwalley and R. M. Stwalley III, "Using broad spectrum technological projects to introduce diverse student populations to Biological & Agricultural Engineering (BAE): a work in progress," in 2021 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition (Long Beach), Washington, DC, 2021, archived @ https://strategy.asee.org/37986.[9] G. L. Baldwin, V. Booth Womack, S. E. LaRose, C. S. Stwalley and R. M
. (2021). Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs. ABET. https://www.abet.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/2022-23-EAC-Criteria.pdfBland, L., Kusano, S., & Johri, A. (2016). Engineering Competitions as Pathways to Development of Professional Engineering Skills. 2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings, 26629. https://doi.org/10.18260/p.26629Burt, B. A., Carpenter, D. D., Finelli, C. J., Harding, T. S., Sutkus, J., Holsapple, M., Bielby, R., & Ra, E. (2011). Outcomes of engaging engineering undergraduates in co-curricular experiences. ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition. https://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/86117Carberry, A. R., Lee, H.-S., & Swan, C. W. (2013). Student
, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material arethose of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.References[1] R. Korte and S. LeBlanc, “Work-in-progress: Investigating the experiences that develop competence for newly hired engineers in an electric power company,” in Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Virtual Conference, 2020.[2] National Academy of Engineering, “Educating the Engineer of 2020: Adapting Engineering Education to the New Century,” The National Academies Press, Washington, DC, 2005.[3] J. W. Prados, “The editor’s page: Engineering criteria 2000—A change agent for engineering education,” Journal of
of the cognitive processes, as well as pursue otherdimensions of students’ dialogue, such as their metacognitive interactions. Groups’ experiencescan also be further investigated through qualitative excerpts. This study supports the evolution ofcollaborative problem solving by demonstrating why task scaffolding can effectively engagestudents in processes and interactions that lead to higher-quality work.AcknowledgementsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No.1628976. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material arethose of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.References[1] S. Freeman, S. L. Eddy, M
Alliance (NCIIA). EMSresearch continued with support from the National Science Foundation (grant number 1636442).References[1] M. J. Fernandez, J. M. Trenor, K. S. Zerda and C. Cortes, "First generation college studentsin engineering: A qualitative investigation of barriers to academic plans.," in IEEE 38th AnnualFrontiers in Education Conference, Saratoga Springs, NY, 2008.[2] J. M. Trenor, S. L. Yu, W. C. L. and K. S. Zerda, "Influences for selecting engineering:Insights on access to Social Capital from two case studies.," in IEEE 38th Annual Frontiers inEducation Conference, Saratoga Springs, NY, 2008.[3] J. M. Trenor, " A phenomenological inquiry of the major choice processes of an overlookeddemographic: First generation college students in