and thermocouples. [4] Step four involved the crux of the experiment. Some instructions for how they wereto use the data acquisition software were provided along with instructions for how to run theexperiment. The students were then asked to evaluate the results of their experiment by solvingfor certain variables using the data they collected and then answering the challenge questionposed to them at the start. Many of their results included graphs that they could both see in realtime and examine after the data was taken to assist them in understanding what was physicallyhappening. [5] Step five was for reflection and included questions asking about the concepts thatwere stressed during the workshop and was intended to gauge what
) Platinumcertified academic building, shown in Fig. (1)a, as a context to explore applications of the theorystudents’ learn. Another goal is to provide opportunities for hands-on experimentation withsystems that reflect professional practice. To achieve these goals, the ME151 course wasredesigned to incorporate a significant laboratory component. 7 These laboratory sessions exposestudents to practical applications of process control using two educational rigs from FeedbackInstruments. A level-flow rig allows students to control the flow of water or the level of a tank,while a temperature rig, shown in Fig. 1(b), allows students to control temperature by actuatingservo valves that regulate primary and secondary flows through a heat exchanger. Using bothrigs
experience,conceptualize, perceive, and understand various aspects of, and phenomena in, the world aroundthem.” Experiences and phenomena are perceived differently by each individual, sophenomenography seeks to describe the “collective human experience of phenomenaholistically” 29. Based in variation theory, phenomenographic studies result in the keycomponents that comprise the variation under investigation 25,30,31. These categories ofdescription “contain a variety of conceptions and thus indicate that there are differences in theways a phenomenon is understood” 32 and may be depicted as a taxonomy or hierarchy ofunderstanding. The categories of description do not represent the individual responses fromparticipants, but instead collectively reflect
for thisstage will come from snowball sampling methods, because non-completers are an invisible andsensitive population. Either quantitative or qualitative differences (or similarities) between the twogroups (current students vs non-completers) will be fascinating with respect to the graduateengineering socialization process in which writing is an invisible competency.AcknowledgementsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant1733594. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this materialare those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National ScienceFoundation. References[1] Council of Graduate
and curricular materials development in other disciplines.Acknowledgements This material is based upon work supported by the National Science FoundationEngineering Education Program under Grant No. 1055356. Any opinions, findings andconclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author and donot necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.Bibliography1. Nrc, ed. How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School. ed. J. Bransford, et al. National Academy Press: Washington, D.C. xxiii, 319 p. (1999).2. S. Vosniadou, ed. International Handbook of Conceptual Change. Routledge: New York. (2008).3. B.K. Hofer and P.R. Pintrich, The development of epistemological theories
expressed in this material are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. VI. REFERENCES[1] Halloun, I.A. and D. Hestenes, The initial knowledge state of college physics students. American Journal of Physics, 1985. 53(11): p. 1043-‐1048. Page 23.299.4[2] Schell, J.W. and R.S. Black, Situated Learning: an inductive case study of a collaborative learning experience. Journal of Industrial Teacher
Faculty to Student Engagement in Engineering”, Journal of Engineering Education, July 2008. 3. Heller, R., Beil, C., Dam, K., and Haerum B., “Student and Faculty Perceptions of Engagement in Engineering”, Journal of Engineering Education, July 2010. 4. Chang, R., Richardson, J., Banky, G., Coller, B., Jaksa, M., Lindsay, E., and Maier H., “Practitioner Reflections on Engineering Student’s Engagement with e-Learning”, Advances in Engineering Education, Winter 2011. 5. Smith, K., Sheppard, S., Johnson, D., and Johnson, R., “Pedagogies of Engagement: Classroom-Based Practices”, Journal of Engineering Education, January 2005. 6. Bjorklund, S. and Fortenberry, N., “Measuring Student and Faculty Engagement in
thefuture. During thesefocus groups, the Incident Cardteam will use the Describe an incident in the workplace that occurred within the first six months toCritical Incident three years after you’d first started working.Method (CIM) [3] to Does this incident reflect (check one):gather data on jobs Where you successfully performed a job task that you’d learned about in school?and tasks that are Where you were unsuccessful in performing a job task because your engineering education hadn’t prepared you to do it?essential forengineering. CIM What were the general circumstances leading up to this incident?involves gathering
teachingabilities, even if the experience was not enjoyable for one of them; b) the middle-schoolers had 5fun and learned coding; and 3) there is a need to reach out to diverse groups and to the youngergeneration. In the focus group discussion, one student reflected that “I think as a whole, for us, todumb-down our research so they can understand a standard helps us to understand our material.Yes, it gave us a better understanding of our own project and the kids did have fun—that was agood purpose of the activity.” The dissatisfaction of the one student who disliked the activity isapparent in this exchange with notes from the program evaluator, “I was not a big fan of theoutreach activity. I do not like
certainty. Whereas the students in our previous study hadself-developed this “connecting” skill, our program provides a formal platform forlow-income students to learn and practice those connecting skills at the graduate level.This will allow us to investigate through pre- and post-surveys whether “connecting”skills can be developed through mentorship and whether developed connecting skillsenhance their self-efficacy, STEM identities, and persistence beliefs.This poster shares the results from student surveys completed at the beginning of our firstacademic year of the S-STEM program, reflecting on their undergraduate experiences.Specifically, we highlight the particular FOK held by our students as they enteredgraduate school from engineering and
data obtained independently from the five members of the research team were used togenerate point maps and cluster maps using multi-dimensional scaling that were useful indiscussions of the most useful documents to collect and to themes within data collection. We arecurrently incorporating this into our planning processes. We expect to complete reflections onthis process soon.References[1] “CMAP software,” Cmap. [Online]. Available: https://cmap.ihmc.us/docs/origins.php. [Accessed: 01-May-2023].[2] W. M. Trochim, “Hindsight is 20/20: Reflections on the evolution of concept mapping,” Evaluation and Program Planning, vol. 60, pp. 176–185, 2017.[3] C. A. Bergeron, A. Hargrove, B. Tramontana, J. Steyer, A. Emily, D. Davison, A
results have been published [8]. The execution details and assessment resultsof the Summer Bridge Program were published at an educational conference [9]. Theimplementation of an introductory course and its impact on students' academic success andretention was also published at an educational conference [4]. Also, the structure of the industrymentorship program for undergraduate students was published by an engineering educationjournal [10].ConclusionsFifty scholars have been recruited in three cohorts (cohort I, 18 students, cohort II, 13 students,and cohort III, 19 students). Diversity on campus is reflected in all cohorts of scholars. Twoscholars from cohort I and three from cohort III left the program because of personal issues. Allcohort I
constructed andgiven the multiple positionalities of our team, both sets of experiences would influence the co-construction of the students’ experiences [13]. By extension, our collective experience withinthe college of engineering and the SSTEM program would shape our interpretations of the data[13]. Furthermore, the constructivist approach to grounded theory aligns with a relativistontology and subjective epistemology which require the researchers to ensure transparency inthe analytic process through reflective engagement [14]. The constructivist method of GTrepresents a call to action and can involve approaches such as using the analysis as a foundationfor making specific changes in the lives and experiences of the program participants [15
professional path; and irritations withinjustice and power dynamic issues in academia.Publications:Shanachilubwa, K., Sallai, G., & Berdanier, C.G.P. (2023). Investigating the tension betweenpersistence and well-being in engineering doctoral programs. Journal of Engineering Education.Shanachilubwa, K., Ellery, M., Sallai, G., & Berdanier, C.G.P. (2021). “I wish I would haveknown…”: Characterizing engineering students’ reflections on their graduate experiences. 128thASEE Annual Conference & Exposition (held virtually).Phase 1B: Capturing Engineering Graduate Students and Attrition Considerations UsingSMS Text Survey MethodsIn this stage of research, the research team recruited two cohorts of participants representing anational sample
identify physical- Phrases related to the relevance of ‘seeing’ environmental similarities between the site how structures were damaged; direct visited and the site assigned for their project. reference to how damages to the structure helped them visualize and ponder their project; statements that reflect possible applications of their observations to the design of the school module. Students will describe flaws in design and Reference to details of damage in buildings, construction observed in a building damaged for
involved 9 - Student makes an estimation for the answer Student determines whether typical formulas, etc can be used or ifDetermine a Standard Problem adjustments need to be made 1 - Student statement reflects conclusions made through logic or mentions relationship between factors (identification of key relations) 2 - Student identifies equations/formulas needed to solved problemKey Relations (identification of key equations
toengage at the individual, institutional, and network levels. Adjustments from deadline-drivenactivities to competency-driven deliverables reflected the need to meet HSIs where they are, justas faculty and staff are asked to meet their students where they are.Finally, work-based andundergraduate research-based experiences repositories complemented with culturally-responsiveinstruction are being made easily accessible.BackgroundThe ALRISE Alliance is NSF’s Eddie Bernice Johnson INCLUDES Alliance that was awardedin August 2021 with the vision of developing a Networked Improvement Community (NIC)comprised primarily of two-year Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSIs) and emerging HSIsrepresented by their educators and community partners who collaborate
guidelines onwhat should take place at a hackathon or how to host one because every hackathon is unique.Hackathons are often tailored for achieving specific goals. These goals range from focusing on aspecific computing disciplines to promoting the inclusion of certain groups within technology.Traditional hackathons have, however, frequently come under discussion for lacking inclusivityand diversity. Technology is a crucial component of contemporary society, and those whodevelop it should consider the varied viewpoints and experiences of the consumers they serve.Inclusive hackathons are a crucial step in developing a more diverse and equitable IT sector.These events assist in ensuring that the goods and services we use daily reflect the needs
this first cohort,and we met that goal. Ten proposals, representing 11 different institutions, were received, vettedfollowing NSF practices (e.g., teams responded to clarifying questions to ensure alignment withthe Hub goals), and selected. We met our overarching objectives of having a set of grantrecipients that reflect the S-STEM program diversity. Recipients include small privateinstitutions, large research institutions, minority-serving institutions, community colleges, andregionally focused institutions that represent a wide geographic footprint. Campus-specificprojects being advanced by this budding community of practice focus on how to recruit low-income students from different institutional contexts, topics with a community college
curriculum (four days). Figure 3 shows changes in these measurespre- and post- implementation. Figure 3. Pilot data collected on day 1 and day 4 of a soft robotics implementation (n=10 students).Reflections on Pilot Study, ChangesImplementation Student participants were focused and engaged in the activities. We received feedbackon the survey in a prompt asking, “Is there anything else you’d like to tell us?”. One student commented,“I really enjoyed all of the activities from the week. They were very engaging and informative.” Anotherstudent noted the desire for similar activities at their school, saying, “I really enjoyed the class, wereally need something like this at [school name].” In addition to students generally being interested inthe
Thinking into a Neural Engineering High School CurriculumAbstractEngineering design and computational thinking are critical to contemporary STEM research.This is reflected in the Next Generation Science Standards, which call for broadly exposingK-12 students to engineering design and computational thinking as core practices. Thedevelopment and investigation of pathways to successfully integrate these practices in all sciencedisciplines are presently limited. Here, we propose a framework for efficiently connectingcomputational thinking practices with engineering design, and describe a four weekNGSS-congruent module that strategically weaves opportunities for high school life sciencestudents to apply engineering design and
use all the tools acquired in their undergraduateprograms. Simultaneously, students can contribute to one of the goals of society through researchand development of emergency housing in Puerto Rico [4] The paper presents the instructionaldesign, results, and evaluation of the Design-Build course, and finally reflects about lessons learnedand relevance of this type of interdisciplinary learning scenario.2. Methods and Results. 2.1. Method / Semester Project.The design project consisted of conceptualizing a group of emergency houses. Four smallliving units with the same floor plan, interconnected by a central open space where thepersons will be able to interact and develop a sense of community. These small units areexpected to be self
et al., 2008; Christensen and Schunn, 2007;Davis and Sumara 2006; Grinter, 1956; Jonassen, 2000; NAE, 2004; Silk and Schunn, 2008).Proposed ApproachThe central idea in this proposed approach is to have students work on two parallel projects, oneis the technical redesign of simple kitchen appliances (e.g., a toaster), and the other the design oftheir academic path (i.e., courses to take, extracurricular activities, habits, skills, etc.). While thestudents work on these two parallel projects, a periodical intervention will help them connect thetechnical approaches to their academic project. For example, using journals and reflection tounderstand how students had to frame a problem, ask for help, evaluate options, and decide toimprove a toaster
the supportprogram of this project was published to an educational conference [6]. Also, the results of theimplementation of an introductory course (ENR194) and its impact on students’ academic successand retention was published to an educational conference [7]. In addition, the progress of theproject has been disseminated through two poster presentations [5], [8].Moreover, engineering identity focused interviews with Cohort I Scholars have been conductedand the results have been disseminated by R. A. Revelo et al [9].ConclusionsWe have recruited 31 scholars of which two left the program because of personal issues. Bothcohorts of scholars come from a diverse background that reflects the student diversity on campusand college demographics
. Diefes-Dux, University of Nebraska - Lincoln Heidi A. Diefes-Dux is a Professor in Biological Systems Engineering at the University of Nebraska - Lincoln. She received her B.S. and M.S. in Food Science from Cornell University and her Ph.D. in Food Process Engineering from the Department of Agricultural and Biological Engineering at Purdue University. She was an inaugural faculty member of the School of Engineering Education at Purdue University. Her research focuses on the development, implementation, and assessment of modeling and design activities with authentic engineering contexts. She also focuses on the implementation of learning objective-based grading and reflection. American
list of topics that become the centerpiece of thedesign. Backward design models start with the forward design’s final step (the assessment andfeedback) and evolve towards the forward design’s initial stage, the contents [9]. Thecomponents of the chemistry bridge course design are shown in Figure 1. Figure 1: Components of the chemistry bridge course design.The learning goals, feedback and assessment, and teaching and learning activities are the threecomponents representing the critical decisions to address in the design. The model emphasizesintegrating the three components; they are intimately related and mutually influenced andsupported. The activities must reflect the goals and intended outcomes and lead to
social justice movement motivated by the death of George Floyd alsoled IEC to rethink part of the workshop series. In the summer of 2020, IEC leadership posted thefollowing statement on their website.The world witnessed George Floyd's horrific death captured with cell technology. The blatantdisregard for his life and that of so many others like Ahmaud Arbery, Sandra Bland, MichaelBrown, Philando Castile, Eric Garner, Botham Jean, Atatiana Jefferson, Trayvon Martin, TamirRice and Breonna Taylor is inexcusable and demands justice. Systemic racism must stop!We use this moment to call on all IEC members to reflect on the brutal murder of innocentAfrican Americans and to consider ways to change our institutions. We can no longer tolerateracism
part of who I am” – J (honors)This may reflect the social stratification of educational tracking, with students internalizingavailable stories (narratives) of overachieving related to being smarter for those in moreprestigious pathways [13]. Overall, we have noted that smartness is a function of the context inwhich it is constructed, and the context of each pathway is of importance in understanding howstudents construct their identities. As such, this finding is being further explored acrosspathways, and a conceptual model of smartness identity is in progress to help us further explorethis finding.Future WorkFuture work will consist of the full analysis of the second and third rounds of interviews alongwith a more in-depth exploration of
othersin their cohort to do so. By the end of the Fall, each student was connected to a club ororganization that reflected their major, their background, or a passion area. Despite the concernsand restrictions associated with COVID-19, students were very engaged with one another and thecampus community, which ties into their feeling of belonging and inclusion on campus andwithin their cohort.Belonging and Inclusion As a group, students’ feelings of inclusion (M= 4.75, SD=1.05) are more modest thantheir self-efficacy (M= 5.72, SD=0.93 and M=6.06, SD=0.99), and with greater range amongscholars (Table 2). This is consistent with what we would expect within a predominately whiteinstitution (PWI), even with highly accomplished URM scholars whose
\* ARABIC 5- Exterior view with facades modifications. Figure 3- Cross bracing option. From [8]‘ Figure 4- Interior view of retrofitted building. From [8] Figure 5- Exterior view with facades modifications. From [8].The final activity consisted of preparing a final report and presenting the case study for thescrutiny of other students and mentors. The students answered questions, reflected on the lessonslearned including how this course contributed to their academic preparation. Figure 6- “Map” search screen of the case study repository.Current state of development of the case study cloud-based repositoryThe cloud-based case study repository has been