fifty articles in this area, co-authored the book How Learning Works: 7 Research-Based Principles for Smart Teaching, and developed several innovative, educational technologies, including StatTutor and the Learning Dashboard.Dr. Laura Ochs Pottmeyer, Carnegie Mellon University American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021 A Combined Online Learning / In-Class Activity Approach to Teach Systems Thinking and Systems Engineering Skills to Freshman Engineering StudentsAbstractEngineering graduates from traditional disciplines (e.g., mechanical engineering) have feltincreasing pressure to develop holistic, systems thinking
Engineering + Technology at Western Carolina University. His teaching and research interests include design, robotics, automation, and controls.Prof. James Coffin American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021 Team-teaching a Project-based First-Year Seminar in PandemicAbstractComplete Evidence-based Practice – This paper presents a team-teaching strategy for a project-based first-year seminar during the pandemic. Three faculty members team-taught three sectionsof a First-Year Seminar course in Fall 2020 using project-based learning with students from fiveEngineering and Engineering Technology programs in the department, which encompasselectrical, computer, mechanical
. Engineering students who had completed the WGS 250course in Spring 2018 or 2019 but had not yet graduated (N = 7) were invited to one of two focusgroup sessions held in February, 2020. The invitation included a description of the study and anassurance of confidentiality.Informed consent was obtained from the study participants in writing before any questions wereposed. Discussions were facilitated by one author and a faculty colleague, neither of whom hadserved as an instructor for any WGS class. Focus group facilitators provided copies of the WGS250 reading list as a way of reminding participants of past course content and providingreference points for specific reading and authors. In keeping with best practices for focus groupinteractions
which perspective they are viewingresearch from: a technical one, when solutions are considered as the best way of doing somethingand/or a cultural one, when solutions are evaluated within a specific context. Bringing theseideas alongside the ideas of design-based research presented above, we can interpret phrasessuch as the “best way of doing something” and evaluating solutions “within a specific context”as pointing to the need to interrogate outcomes. In other words, what does it mean for somethingto work. In the following section, we provide details on the specific context in which theInclusivity Meter is used.ContextThe narrative of the Inclusivity Meter is specific to one classroom practice but is embedded in alarger department wide effort
engineering students. Dr. Watson is also interested in understanding and assessing students’ cognitive processes, especially development of cognitive flexibility and interactions with cognitive load. Dr. Watson is the proud recipient of seven teaching awards and six best paper awards. She was previously named the Young Civil Engineer of the Year by the South Carolina Section of ASCE and currently serves as a Senior Associate Editor for the Journal of Civil Engineering Education.Dr. Elise Barrella P.E., Wake Forest University Dr. Elise Barrella is the founder and CEO of DfX Consulting LLC which offers engineering education and design research, planning and consulting services. She is a registered Professional Engineer and was a
. counselor, therapist) for mental health concerns.Underlying this goal was the need to identify similarities in engineering students’ sources ofstress and their approaches to maintaining their mental health. Our research design was guidedby pragmatism, as we believe that (a) an objective reality exists but can only be encounteredthrough subjective human experience [13], (b) beliefs and habits are socially constructed andsubject to sociopolitical forces [14], (c) understanding the problem (i.e., treatment gap) andidentifying practical solutions is the central priority [15], and (d) the best method (e.g.,qualitative, quantitative) is the one most effective in achieving desired research outcomes [16].Therefore, we used IBM as our guiding theoretical
underserved by the education and social sectors. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021 The Endeavour S-STEM Program: A Multi-College Collaboration to Increase Engagement & Retention in STEMIntroductionThe United States has long held its position as the global leader in technological innovation andeducation. But that standing has been in jeopardy due to the shortage of domestic studentsgraduating in STEM. This concern has led researchers to investigate why graduation numbers areso low and also to propose ways in which STEM retention and hence graduation can beincreased. The data show that there are
targeted engineers. For the two sections of engineeringstudents (roughly 25 students in each section for a total of 50 students), the course was a success[11]. In this paper, we outline the history, curriculum design, and implementation of acommunication course targeted to engineering students. While the course centers on oralcommunication and public speaking, it is best described as a targeted communication coursebecause the curriculum also includes written and teamwork components. Because the course is acollaborative effort between a Communication Arts and Sciences Department and a College ofEngineering, it serves as a model for other universities and colleges interested in implementing acommunication skills course specifically for
engineering” due to their interest in pursuing medical, law, or any otherprofessional school. This program is not ABET accredited and preferable for students who do notintend on practicing engineering in the workplace, such as pre-professional degree students. Thesecond path is designed for “students who want to practice engineering around a focusedconcentration by combining or involving several academic disciplines. Both pathways involvestudents developing their plan of study or adapting a well-established plan of study and integratingtheir interests outside of engineering with various combinations of engineering disciplines.PositionalityTo illustrate the importance of providing context when situating research, I will share mypositionality as a
and academia, later receiving her Ph.D. in Civil Engineering and Sustainable Water Resources. Her work highlights a commitment to undergraduate engineering education and its improvement through best teaching practices. Her research efforts target ways to support and encourage diversity among students and how to create an inclusive learning environment.Dr. Carol Haden, Magnolia Consulting, LLC Dr. Carol Haden is Vice President of Magnolia Consulting, LLC, a woman-owned, small business special- izing in independent research and evaluation. She has served as evaluator for STEM education projects sponsored by the National Science Foundation, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the William and Flora
Institute of Technology and Management (HITAM), Hyderabad since 2009 as Associate Professor of Computer Science Engineering. He is a Post Graduate in Computer Applications and Computer Science Engineering. Surendra completed IIEECP (IUCEE International En- gineering Educator Certification Program) during 2015 in the pilot batch. He is a Microsoft Certified Educator. Surendra is currently pursuing his PhD in Engineering Education at KLE Technological Uni- versity, Hubballi, Karnataka. His research area is Service Learning in Engineering.Dr. Rohit Kandakatla, KLE Technological University Dr. Rohit Kandakatla has completed his Ph.D. in Engineering Education from Purdue University and is currently serving as the Director for
out ABET’s accreditation practices, and their underlyingcauses, as a way of assisting ABET, their volunteers, and the academic institutions that rely on1 Formally incorporated as the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology, ABET has presented itself asABET and ABET Inc. since 1980.their services to improve upon their practices and outcomes. We close with several, stillpreliminary recommendations addressed to these three audiences.MethodThe data presented in this study is the product of a broader, exploratory study of changeprocesses and governance in U.S. engineering education. Organized around a basic, multi-sited,multi-scale research design, our research team carried out 277 semi-structured interviews at 43academic organizations
Colonel in the United States Army and an Associate Professor in the Department of Geography and Environmental Engineering at the United States Military Academy. He is also the Dean’s Fellow for Remote Teaching and Distance Learning - Best Practices. He is a 1996 graduate of the United States Military Academy with a B.S. in Environmental Engineering and obtained an M.S. from both the University of Missouri at Rolla in Geological Engineering and the University of Texas at Austin in Environmental Engineering. Most recently, he graduated with his Ph.D. from the Colorado School of Mines in Civil and Environmental Engineering. He teaches Environmental Science and Environmental Engineering Technologies. He also serves as a
(HSI) while Cal Poly is considered for this study a Predominately White Institution (PWI).This current study was initiated by Cal State LA where the faculty researchers have been working to support theirminoritized students for decades. In particular the college has developed outreach, bridge, and supplemental programs tosupport persistence and degree completion (Menezes, 2017, 2019). They have also worked across campus to develop facultyprofessional development activities (Galvan 2020) to support evidence based teaching practices including active learning,flipped classroom, asset-based (Yosso, 2005) and equity minded classroom practices such as mastery grading. One of thesuccessful student based programs, FYrE which is supported with an NSF
Paper ID #34207Focused Curricular Activities Designed to Improve Student Competency inData-driven Process ImprovementMr. Clayton J. Hahola, Montana State University Clay Hahola is currently an Operations Engineer at Go Fast Campers in Bozeman, Montana. He is an Industrial and Management Systems Engineering Masters graduate from Montana State University with a Bachelors in Mechanical Engineering Technology from the same institution. He has worked as a Teaching Assistant for ETME 415, the course this paper references, for three semesters over the tenure of his MS and has had past experience in teaching and grading MET
Education Endowed Professorship in Engineering #1 at The University of Texas at Austin as well as Adjunct Pro- fessor of Imaging Physics at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. Dr. Markey is a 1994 graduate of the Illinois Mathematics and Science Academy. She has a B.S. in computational biology (Carnegie Mellon, 1998). Dr. Markey earned her Ph.D. in biomedical engineering (2002), along with a certificate in bioinformatics, from Duke University. Dr. Markey has been recognized for excellence in research and teaching with awards from organizations such as the American Medical Informatics Asso- ciation, the American Society for Engineering Education, the American Cancer Society, and the Society for Women’s
. Vanderlinded and E. Kim, "A Multi-level Assessment of the Impact of Orientation Programs on Student Learning," Research in Higher Education, p. 320–345, 2010.[7] K. J. Nelson, C. Quinn, A. Marrington and J. Clark, "Good practice for enhancing the engagement and success of commencing students," Higher Education, pp. 83-96, 2012.[8] A. M. Williford, L. C. Chapman and T. Kahrig, "The university experience course: A longitudinal study of student performance, retention, and graduation," Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory and Practice, pp. 327-340, 2001.[9] M. Karp, S. Bickerstaff, Z. Rucks-Ahidiana, R. Bork, M. Barragen and N
up to a computer design,” Proc. - Front. Educ. Conf. FIE, pp. 853–855, 1993, doi: 10.1109/FIE.1993.405385.[28] S. Shapiro, “Degrees of freedom: The interaction of standards of practice and engineering judgment,” Sci. Technol. Hum. Values, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 286–316, 1997, doi: 10.1177/016224399702200302.[29] A. Johri, B. M. Olds, and K. O’connor, “Situative frameworks for engineering learning research,” in Cambridge Handbook of Engineering Education Research, Cambridge University Press, 2015, pp. 47–66.[30] R. A. House, R. Layton, J. Livingston, and S. Moseley, “Engineering ethos in environmental public policy deliberation,” IEEE Int. Prof. Commun. Conf., vol. 2015- Janua, 2015, doi: 10.1109
learning outcomes is alsodescribed.Introduction:During the summer of 2020, we hosted a virtual summer camp for high school and early-college STEM students. The subject is related to advanced manufacturing (AM) and 3Dprinting. This outreach is funded by the Department of Energy DOE consortium project. Withthis summer program, our objective is to prepare a pool of students in the AM area, in highdemand in industrial and national research laboratories.High school Architectural and Engineering Drafting teachers from Guilford Countyparticipated in the workshop to help with teaching and designing the activities and theprogram. A University faculty participated in organizing the workshop activities andinstructed the students on a number of engineering
their identity and promote change on the campus atlarge.Here, we will discuss our design and implementation of a LGBTQIA+ reading group for STEMstudents and faculty as a mechanism to disrupt the erasure of queer narratives in STEM. Throughthis group, students are able to discuss queer identities and social issues in a formal setting andconnect with literature that validates their experiences of isolation and discrimination in their field.We will discuss the reading group structure and design, provide reflection on best practices fromour pilot group in Fall 2020, and will present student and faculty reflections on their experiencesin the group.Reading Group Development and StructureReading Group DevelopmentThe idea to run this reading group
unique contributions, particularly within aSTEM field that is often misunderstood [4]. Further, the nature and context of learningenvironments was found to impact caregivers’ adoption of various roles and speaks to the valueof purposefully designed and supplied environments to facilitate learning.Related WorkCaregivers play an important role in shaping their children’s STEM experiences, dispositions,identities, interests, and practices [12]–[17]. For example, Vedder-Weis [17] highlighted howfamily negotiations of roles and recognition within everyday interactions around sciencepositioned one child as the science person (i.e., “good” science participant) and another child asthe science antagonist (i.e., uncooperative or a hostile science
Paper ID #34380Study Abroad While Studying Abroad: International Students’Participation in the RSAP Study Abroad ProgramJohnny C. Woods Jr., Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Johnny C. Woods, Jr. is a Ph.D. Candidate in the Department of Higher Education and Research Group Coordinator for the Engineering Competencies, Learning, and Inclusive Practices for Success (ECLIPS) Lab in the Department of Engineering Education at Virginia Tech. Johnny is also a Graduate Teaching Assistant for the Graduate School Certificate Course–Preparing the Future Professoriate. He has a Master in Educational Foundations and
Paper ID #33669Industry-University Capstone Design: How Did Students Adapt to theCOVID-19 Pandemic?Ms. Shruti Misra, Unviersity of Washington Shruti Misra is a graduate student in Electrical and Computer Engineering at the University of Wash- ington, Seattle. Her research interest is broadly focused on studying innovation in university-industry partnerships. She is interested in the various ways that universities and industry come together and par- ticipate in driving technological innovation at the regional and global level.Dr. Denise Wilson, University of Washington Denise Wilson is a professor of electrical engineering
professor in the College of Technology with a joint appointment in the College of Education at Purdue University. Hired as a part of the strategic P12 STEM initiative, he prepares Engineering/Technology candidates for teacher licensure. Dr. Mentzer’s educational efforts in pedagogical content knowledge are guided by a research theme centered in student learning of engineer- ing design thinking on the secondary level. Nathan was a former middle and high school technology educator in Montana prior to pursuing a doctoral degree. He was a National Center for Engineering and Technology Education (NCETE) Fellow at Utah State University while pursuing a Ph.D. in Curriculum and Instruction. After graduation he completed a one
Washington State University (2013-2014) and George Mason University (2014-2017). Throughout his career, his primary responsibility as a faculty member has been teaching students, for which he aspires to provide them with a quality and enjoyable experience.Dr. William A. Kitch, Angelo State University Dr. Kitch is Professor and Chair of the David L. Hirschfeld Department of Engineering at Angelo State University. Before starting his academic career he spent 24 years as a practicing engineer in both the public and private sector. He is a registered professional engineer in Colorado, California and Texas American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021Make
passions is teaching. Her area of teaching specialization is structural engineering with a particular emphasis in the analysis and design of buildings. At Penn State she currently teaches a structural analysis course, the advanced steel design course and a graduate level course in steel connections. Her approach to these courses is to provide strategies for complex problem solving and a framework for lifelong learning. She is the recipient of the Penn State Engineering Society’s Outstanding Teaching Award (2003) and the Premier Teaching Award (2008). Building on a strong teaching record and an interest in building a more diverse engineering community, Dr. Hanagan has begun to expand her research into engineering
graduated from the Harvard Graduate School of Design in 2010 with a Master in Architec- ture. After working as a researcher studying novel applications for industrial robots in custom manufac- turing processes, he joined the MIT Department of Architecture in 2011 as an instructor and eventually director of the MIT Architecture Shops. He joined the MIT New Engineering Education Transforma- tion as a lead technical instructor in 2019. Throughout his time at MIT he has focused on developing and teaching courses at the intersection of design, technology, and making, while also participating in a number of research projects focusing on new fabrication techniques. American
her research, including the Joenk Award for the best article in IEEE Transactions in Professional Communication, the Nell Ann Pickett Award for best article in Technical Communication Quarterly, and the NCTE Best Article in Theories of Technical Communication (in both 2015 and 2018). She is also the co-founder of Women in Technical Communication, a mentoring organization that received the 2015 Diana Award from ACM Special Interest Group in the Design of Communication.Dr. Monica Farmer Cox, The Ohio State University Monica F. Cox, Ph.D., is Professor in the Department of Engineering Education at The Ohio State Uni- versity. Prior to this appointment, she was an Associate Professor in the School of Engineering Education
Paper ID #33015Using the Learning and Study Strategies Inventory (LASSI) to TrackStudents’ Growth and Evaluate the Effectiveness of a Learning StrategiesCourseMs. Abigail T. Stephan, Clemson University Abigail Stephan is a doctoral candidate in the Learning Sciences program at Clemson University. Broadly, her research interests include intergenerational learning in informal settings and self-directed learning. Since 2017, Abigail has been the graduate assistant for the General Engineering Learning Community (GELC), a program that supports first-year engineering students in their development of self-regulation and time
explicitly included writing instruction and emphasis on whatwas important in technical writing and the process of writing. The workshops also included timein-class for students to work on and revise work, with the help of WC staff, designated WCtutors and the course instructors. This structure therefore incorporated active learning andexplicit technical communication instruction that was not included in the course previously.Future work will evaluate the impact of these workshops on the quality of writing.In 442, the students worked in groups of four and received extra credit for setting up a groupmeeting with a WC tutor prior to submitting their report. They could receive extra credit for thetutor reviewing their experimental plans and