to contribute to characterizing (1) the number ofcommunity college students enrolled in individual e/et programs, (2) the number of communitycollege students who have either completed an associate’s degree program or directly transferredto a baccalaureate program, and (3) the number of baccalaureate degree recipients who begantheir education in a community college. This data will allow us to answer our overall researchquestion: “How many students who have substantially completed an e/et program of study in acommunity college transfer to a baccalaureate e/et degree program irrespective of whether they Page 22.1158.2have completed the
. Yet this population continues to be understudied. Thispaper examines the paths that women take toward employment in STEM at communitycolleges as well as factors that facilitate and hinder the advancement of women in STEMat community colleges. Data were collected by face-to-face interviews with 29 womenfaculty at nine community colleges in Ohio. Preliminarily results indicate considerablecareer satisfaction among many female faculty members, but contradict a popularstereotype that “community colleges make life easier for women with families.”.1. IntroductionCommunity colleges are key to the future of the United States, as they help fill the demand for askilled domestic workforce in science- and technology-related fields. To succeed, workers
to 3 million students every year,1 byproviding affordable and accessible education. The community college system feeds two largepublic university systems, the 23-campus comprehensive California State University (CSU)system, and the 10-campus research-oriented University of California (UC) system, as well asnumerous private and out-of-state universities. Ideally, students should be able to complete all oftheir lower-division coursework at a community college and then transfer to a four-yearinstitution to complete the last two years, thus earning a bachelor’s degree in approximately fouryears.In the 2006-2007 academic year, for instance, 55% of California State University (CSU)graduates and 28% of University of California (UC) graduates began
transferring from one institution of higher education to anotherto experience a temporary dip in grade point average during the first or second semester at thenew institution.” 1 As early as 1954, researchers were comparing transfer students to nativestudents to determine if they performed the same academically. Martorana and Williams at theState College of Washington found that the transfers had a problem of adjustment which affectedtheir academics effectiveness during their first semester of transfer, which became “negligible”as the transfer students adjusted.3The term “transfer shock” was coined by John R. Hills of the University System of Georgia in1965.2 The term grew out of the discussions on whether a community college transfer studentdoes as
participation of diversepopulations in engineering and other technical careers.1, 4, 5, 6, 9 The attention that has beendirected toward community college pathways is motivated by several attractive qualities thatthese campuses offer. First, community college faculty are experienced in remediation, anincreasingly important issue for all engineering schools in the U.S. They are well positioned inthis regard to participate in workforce transitions, (e.g., second careers), or returning to schoolafter extended periods of time. Second, community college tuition is more affordable than tuitionfees at four-year campuses; hence, community colleges offer a practical alternative forfinancially sensitive students and their families. Third, community colleges
course: 1) each instructor represents a unique engineeringdiscipline and collectively the team provides a foundation for a broad introductory curriculum,2) each instructor is physically located at a different regional campus, mimicking thegeographical dispersion of students and supporting student learning and engagement, and3) together, the interplay of the multi-disciplinary, geographically dispersed instructor teamrealistically depicts today’s engineering workplace and promotes the field as a viable,meaningful career choice through open discussion and learner discovery. Results from studentcourse evaluations and surveys, and instructor reflections are used to comment on and assess thebasic effectiveness of the instructional approach.Team
University of Tennessee at Chattanooga College of Engineering and Computer Science areteaming to provide students the first two years of the engineering program in parallel. This paperdefines the curricular, instructional, and structural components of the curriculum and partnership.The paper emphasizes the actions taken to ensure (1) desired learning outcomes are coordinatedbetween the two institutions and (2) means are developed to consistently and accurately test theoutcomes to support accreditation needs for both programs. Page 22.1200.2Engineering at The University of Tennessee at ChattanoogaThe mission of the College of Engineering and
andgoverning groups across the nation are beginning to scrutinize time to graduation rates ofbaccalaureate degrees.1 The US Department of Education recently increased the reporting ofuniversity graduation rates from six to eight years, due to the increasing length of time studentsare taking to complete a baccalaureate degree. The increase in time to complete a degree isattributed to factors, such as increased cost of attendance and student employment to help pay forcollege, which may cause part-time enrollment. 2, 3 A study by an NSF funded engineeringeducation center, indicates that the pool of engineering students remains those entering as firsttime students, since very few students migrate into engineering from other degree paths.4 Thereare many
engineering bachelor’s degrees increased from lessthan 1% to 13% over that time frame, with women earning 41 bachelor’s degrees in those twodisciplines combined in 1966 and obtaining 2,571 electrical and 2,107 mechanical degrees in2006. Because those two disciplines have historically made up over half of the engineeringdegrees and in 2006 comprised 36,026 (53%) of the total engineering bachelor’s degrees1, thisindicates a serious problem in recruiting, retaining, and advancing girls and women in thesefields. See Figure 1 for number of bachelor’s degrees earned by women and men in engineering,electrical engineering, and mechanical engineering for the years 1966 to 2006 (Note that no datawas available for 1999).Although women’s underrepresentation in
Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada.5 Clark, M. C., Revuelto, J., Kraft, D., & Beatty, P. (2003). Learning to work in teams. Journal of Student-CenteredLearning, 1(3), 171-178.6 Romkey, L. (2007). Attracting and retaining females in engineering programs: Using and STSE approach.Retrieved April 10, 2008 from http://www.asee.org/conferences/paper-view.cfm?id=55187 Heyman, G., Martyna, B., & Bhatia, S. (2002). Gender and achievement-related beliefs among engineeringstudents. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, (8)1, 41-53.8 Bean, J. P. (2005). Nine themes of college student retention. In A. Seidman (Ed.), College student retention.Formula for student success (pp. 215-244). Westport, CT: American Council on Education
model isthat these short-term projects and programs do not include long-term dedicated staff to carry outstrategies; however, this heavier reliance on STEM faculty and administrators means that theprojects are less vulnerable to fluctuations in funding and that they encourage the full “buy in” Page 22.1555.3and support of those same faculty members and administrators.In its own project model, the Institute for Women in Trades, Technology and Science (IWITTS)has chosen to focus on this integrative and institutional approach for increasing the number ofwomen in STEM for several reasons: 1) out of a belief that focusing on strategies for
Despite nearly 20 years of recruitment and retention efforts focused on female students,women constituted only 19% of engineering students in 2007. A cross-case analysis of sixengineering schools based on rich qualitative data from faculty, student, and administratorinterviews, as well as observations and documents, provides a unique opportunity to identifytrends and unique practices used to address the recruitment and retention of women engineeringstudents. This paper focuses specifically on how these institutions implement K-12 outreach,admissions, summer/bridge, and first and second-year support programs. We find three themesthat support recruitment of female students: 1) historical commitment, institutional type, andgeographical location; 2
in our university?It should be noted that all of our degree programs in the university would have qualified forresearch of the reasons why secondary level school girls choose the highly male-dominatedengineering fields. However, with the interest in the most problematic cases, the research wasdirected to scrutinize the most male-dominated degree programs: computer science,automation and systems technology and electronics. The proportions of female students in theresearched degree programs are presented in the Table [1]. The reader should observe that theofficial numbers of students registered in the university are much higher than the number ofstudents that actually begin their studies
in the CREW2 survey withthose in the ATU survey. A full report of the CREW2 survey, which includes comparisonbetween the female and male responses, has been made elsewhere7.Comparisons of ATU and CREW2 respondent personal and employment profilesYear of graduation, age and further studyAlthough the sample numbers obviously differed (56 for ATU compared with1187 for CREW2)the distribution of graduation dates and ages was very similar, as illustrated in Figures 1 and 2.The age distribution of the ATU respondents showed that 71% were under 40 years of age andthe corresponding figure for female CREW2 respondents was 84.4%.A higher engineering-related qualification was held by 8.9% of ATU respondents, comparedwith 20.0% of female CREW2 respondents
videoto determine the contribution of each team member to the presentation content, breaking downthe presentation slides into a series of 6 categories representing an array of technical levels: 1. Title Slide or Final Slide Page 22.1449.5 2. Introduction or Summary or Recap 3. Background 4. Overview Description of Design Solution (What it looks like) or Alternative Designs or Conclusions or Recommendations 5. Detailed Description of Design Solution (What it does/How it works/Cost/Drawbacks and Refutation) 6. Technical Specifications (materials, properties) or Testing Results or
environment. We use Guinier,Torres and Strum’s “Miner’s Canary” theory that minority group behavior is an important tool asa leading indicator of change to help provide insight for faculty and administrators interested inunderstanding the ways in which admissions criteria, pedagogy, curriculum, and institutionalenvironments need to be changed to not only support the needs of the minority groups but makethe environment healthier for all2.Moore, Brown & Scarupa6 reported that indicators are often underutilized in “the broader socialpolicy arena” (p.1) despite their widespread acceptance in so many other fields. Yet theseindicators can provide valuable information to policy makers on the macro, meso, and microlevels6. Moore, Brown, and Scarupa6
.MethodologyTwo research questions investigated in this qualitative study are:1. Can a boundary metaphor aid in understanding engineering faculty members’ explicit or implicit descriptions of engineering or their discipline within engineering?2. How do faculty members’ descriptions interact with historically and socially influenced ideas about women’s and men’s work?Ten engineering faculty members were interviewed from a small Mexican private institution ofhigher learning committed to first-class teaching, public service, research and learning in a widerange of academic disciplines including business administration, the physical and social sciences,engineering, humanities, and the arts. These faculty members were selected from a pool ofpotential
incoming students‟ educational goals and the major that they ultimately completed. For purposes of subgroup analysis, African-American, Asian/Pacific Islanders, Hispanic/Latinos are grouped together as “ALANA.” Also, all STEM undergraduate degree programs that are offered at the institution are grouped into four disciplinary categories as shown in Table 1 although the Computer Science degree should not properly be thought of as a technology degree and the speech pathology program is rather distinctive and separate from the other science programs in a number of ways. Table 1: Crosswalk between STEM Majors to STEM Disciplines Major STEM
engineering degrees have been uneven at the bachelor’s level,shown relative increases at the master’s level and a slow but steady increase at the doctoral levelas shown in Figure 1. Unlike many other areas of science, technology, engineering andmathematics (STEM), a bachelor’s degree rather than an advanced degree, is the principlecredential for entre to the engineering profession. Among students who earned a bachelor’sdegree between 2003 and 2006, Figure 1. U.S. Engineering Degrees 1979-2008median earnings for those whosecured employment upon Number of U.S. Engineering Degrees by Year and Level, 1979 - 2008graduation were $50,000, which is
an agreement betweenthe institutions, the implementation of a course transfer process, and the development of aprocedure for foreign language training and cultural preparation. In addition, we also discuss thekey lessons learned over the first three years of the program.Our program is under the auspices of the U.S. Department of Education’s Fund for theImprovement of Postsecondary Education (FIPSE) on the U.S. side, and under the auspices ofthe Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nivel Superior (CAPES) of the BrazilianMinistry of Education, on the Brazilian side.1. IntroductionGlobal markets are currently dictating the way that national economies around the world design,distribute, and consumer goods and services. As a result
). Page 22.1086.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2011Multi-Dimensional Tele-healthcare Engineering Undergraduate Education via Building-Block-based Medical Sensor Labs Fei Hu Qi Hao Debra McCallum Electrical and Computer Engineering Institute for Social Science Research (ISSR) University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL, USA University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL, USA {fei, qh}@eng.ua.edu {dmccallu@as.ua.edu}Abstract 1 – The entire world is facing healthcare challenges. Human society is in critical need of trained tele
Engineering Teaching Institute that willassist community college engineering faculty in developing a Tablet-PC-enhanced interactivemodel of engineering instruction, and implementing online courses using CCC Confer—avideoconferencing platform that is available free of charge to all faculty and staff of theCalifornia Community College system. ONE-STEP will also develop partnerships withcommunity colleges currently without an engineering program to design and implement a JointEngineering Program that is delivered through CCC Confer. The program has the potential tosignificantly increase the viability of engineering programs by increasing teaching efficiency andeffectiveness with minimal additional costs.1. IntroductionThe critical role that community
of discrete event systems, production planning and control, industrial information systems, data analysis and knowledge discovery, and engineering education research. He has taught courses in the areas of systems modeling and analysis, information systems design, production planning, facilities design, and systems simulation. He also co- authored the 2006 Joint Publishers Book-of-the-Year textbook, Design of Industrial Information Systems, Elsevier. Address: Department of Industrial and Management Systems Engineering, University of South Florida, 4202 E Fowler Ave ENB118, Tampa FL 33620-5350; telephone: (+1) 813.974.5590; e-mail: ayalcin@usf.edu
. Page 22.1112.2 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2011 1 Integrating Nanodevice Design, Fabrication, and Analysis into the Mechanical Engineering Curriculum Mechanical Engineering Department University of Washington, Seattle WA 98195-2600 I. I NTRODUCTION This article describes a new nanotechnology undergraduate education (NUE) program onthe design of nanodevices in the Mechanical Engineering Department at the University ofWashington. The goal of the NUE program is to prepare mechanical engineers to designnanodevices. The NUE program
to students forming their own study groups as wellas increased realization among the students that there was no obvious consequence for notattending the groups. Our initial observations of the impact of the study groups include thefollowing: (1) there was a subset of students who were likely to succeed in the course withoutattending any study group; (2) for the remainder of the students, the students’ grades were oftenhigher based upon attending more study group sessions; and (3) the study groups for the CollegeAlgebra and Trigonometry courses had the largest impact on students’ performance, particularlyin the Fall 2009 semester. The results indicate that study groups can be a successful method forimproving first-year student learning of
using chapters from multiple sources.In the following sections three cases of adoption/adaptation of the MUSE materials into existing,EE sub-discipline courses are described. They exemplify steps that can be taken to efficientlyenhance courses with systems-thinking content, and assessment of the improvement in studentunderstanding of systems concepts is reported in each case.Case #1: Adoption of MUSE Systems-Centric Material into RF/Microwave Circuits IDepartment Profile – The Electrical Engineering Department the University of South Florida hasapproximately 200 undergraduate students and 25 faculty members. Every student is required totake a 2 credit-hour laboratory course called Wireless Circuits & Systems Laboratory, which istypically
with accumulated amount of 1 million.Lin Li, Prairie View A&M University Dr. Lin Li is an assistant professor of the Computer Science Department at Prairie View A&M University. He received his Ph.D. in Computer Science from the University of Nebraska-Lincoln in 2004. Before that, he received his B.S. and M.E. from Beijing Institute of Technology and Chinese Academy of Sciences, in 1996 and 1999, respectively. His research interests include Computer Educational Technology, Computer Networks, Web Applications and Information Management.Xuemin Chen, Texas Southern University Xuemin Chen received his academic degrees (B.S., M.S. and Ph.D.) from the Nanjing University of Science and Technology, China, in 1985
levelengineering students in an effort to facilitate social engagement. Lastly, by using a diverse set ofmentors the program will provide a role model for students from underrepresented groups.The evaluation plan for this project will incorporate a mixed-methods approach to data collectionin determining if there is a correlation between engineering retention rates and student success incalculus classes that use problem-based learning modules with peer mentors.1. IntroductionDespite significant improvements made in engineering education, persistence rates remain lessthan desirable1,2. Some of the most significant factors to persistence in engineering is a student’squantitative skills, both perceived and real, and commitment to engineering3. Students that
to Nanoscale Science and Technology and Experimental NanoscaleScience and Technology and provide students at UC with an outstanding educational experiencein nanoscale science and engineering. The new and existing courses support UC studentsparticipating in the Engineering Research Center (ERC) for Revolutionizing MetallicBiomaterials in which UC partners with lead institution North Carolina Agricultural andTechnical State University and the University of Pittsburgh. They also address the need for atechnologically advanced workforce in the areas of nanomaterials and nanotechnology asexpressed by Ohio's Third Frontier Project 1 and Deloitte Study 2 and by employers in UC’sinternationally acclaimed mandatory co-op engineering program. All four