reviews each of the demos/videos,discuss how they are incorporated into the class, and describe how to fabricate/procure the demoequipment.1. Introduction In the last few years, there has been an increasing trend in the debate about the pros andcons of active learning in the classroom, and many have moved away from the traditional lectureformat.1 While active learning comes in several forms, most agree that activities that aredesigned to engage the students, pique their interest, and are carefully selected to coordinate andsupplement the lesson plans tend to improve students’ understanding and retention of keyconcepts.1 Although active or experiential learning has been highly promoted as of late, it hasbeen researched for several decades
?id=qmSySHvIy5IC[28] N. C. M. Hartsock, “The Feminist Standpoint: Developing the Ground for a Specifically Feminist Historical Materialism,” in Discovering Reality: Feminist Perspectives on Epistemology, Metaphysics, Methodology, and Philosophy of Science, S. Harding and M. B. Hintikka, Eds., Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 1983, pp. 283–310. doi: 10.1007/0-306-48017-4_15.Appendix A - Macroethics lesson plan Learning Objectives: Students will be able to gain confidence and tools to discuss macroethics in aerospace engineering a. Understand that there are a variety of answers b. Understand that positionality and power influence how
hearing all voices prior to decision-making takes time. Dr. Cox was leading this project with several of the “antidotes” to urgency described by Okun, including a commitment to equity and a work plan based on the experience of the people involved [33]. This Dialogue with Dr. Cox completely reshaped my idea of what true collaboration means and forced me to reflect on how often “urgency” got in the way of inclusive collaboration in my past work. I have grown to recognize my impatience when decision-making is taking a “long time” and to challenge the root of that impatience.Embracing differences through Dialogue can help develop accomplice behavior [11]. Workingwith Dr. Cox has challenged Dr. Ita to move
followed the same detailed grading rubric, grading styles (e.g., being more liberal withpartial credit) could potentially have affected the results. Further, while comparing metrics fromthe TRAD with the AL and AL+BT groups, it is not clear if the actual Bloom’s Taxonomyquestions or the method of delivery of the questions (i.e., active learning) influenced studentperformance. In the following semester, the authors plan to deliver the targeted Bloom’sTaxonomy questions without active learning by eliminating the collaborative in-class activities,describing answers to the higher-order questions as part of the lecture, and having the‘understand’, ‘analyze’, and ‘evaluate’ questions as part of the homework and quizzes. Bycomparing student performance
engineering in undergraduate engineering through asocial justice lens. Future work needs to continue to investigate the challenges and benefits tosuch integration from the perspectives of the students and the instructors, which we plan topursue through future empirical work. The papers that we focused on in this review containthorough descriptions of the development and implementation of curriculum that integrate socialand technical aspects of engineering through a social justice lens, which is an essential first stepin working towards this goal. For example, Mejia et al. [23] describe in detail the developmentand implementation of two courses, and Hendricks and Flores’ [34] described in detail thecurricular materials that they used. While Mejia et
the near future to obtain a “seat at the table,” it gives me hope that thereare also several dialogues happening to ensure a right step forward in terms of gender equity. Ininstitutions and workspaces in recent times, there have been multiple dialogues and in some casesratification of contracts to ensure an expansion in the paid parental leave, and this step woulddefinitely reduce barriers for early career womxn who are planning on starting a family. Also,there are a lot of free resources available for those who want to educate themselves and practiceinclusivity in their workspace. Additionally, I think it is important to create initiatives (industrybased fellowship/internship opportunities to pursue higher studies) that encourage more womxn
Paper ID #37635Examining the Impact of Introductory Mathematics Courses onUndergraduate Students’ Desire to Pursue a STEM MajorSydney Hunt, Duke University Sydney Hunt is a Reginaldo Howard Memorial Scholar at Duke University (Class of 2023). She is ma- joring in Electrical/Computer Engineering and Computer Science with a concentration in Artificial Intel- ligence and Machine Learning. She is also minoring in Gender, Sexuality, and Feminist Studies. Syd- ney plans to pursue a Ph.D. in Electrical/Biomedical Engineering post-graduation while continuing to be heavily involved in organizations dedicated to mentoring and
asengineering learners and educators as well as their understanding of the importance of communication indiverse engineering teams.Table 2 below shows the overall structure of the interview protocol for both student and facultyparticipants. The table also shows the relationship between the questions asked for each group in order tosubstantiate evidence of similarities and differences between the two groups, as well as links between theinterview questions and the research questions. 5. Plans for data analysisWe have concluded the data collection for this research and are currently in the process of analyzing theinterview data. This qualitative study will use coding practices derived from grounded theory (Saldaña,2016). After segmenting the data, we
examine the resistance toadvocacy efforts, which hinders increased representation, participation, and belonging inengineering. We did not initially plan to explain why individuals resist advocacy efforts, yet ourongoing research into self-efficacy and self-advocacy around HC messages in engineeringpositioned us to examine individuals’ resistance to advocacy. Our previous HC research hasfocused on women [9], undergraduate and graduate students [7], and faculty members [17] inengineering who utilize their self-efficacy to understand and cope with negative HC messages.Since this past research focused on individuals’ strategies, we have not considered theexperiences of individuals who are resistant to self-advocacy, or advocacy for others
Halston’suse of “praise” equalizes the voice and input of a lower-status student relative to a higher-statusstudent. Deliberate use of praise to boost self-esteem requires much thought on an LA's partbecause they need to be attentive to the motivations they bring into their instructional moves andmake sure that they recognize specific competencies in assigning praise (as opposed to generic,effusive praise).Understanding how LAs construct and understand what status-based inequalities look like withinthe classroom and how they plan to navigate them has important implications for interpretingtheir role as potential status interventionists. LAs are mediators in various aspects of a student’slearning, and their roles as agents within the classroom activity
changes. The iteration aims to ground our work in praxis [12] and transform thecurriculum through reflective action.Conceptualizing the engineering curriculumWe would like to start by clarifying what we mean by a curriculum because the definitions ofa curriculum range from everything that happens in a course [13] to a plan for learning [14]to the materials used for teaching [15], [16]. The word curriculum is often not even defined inthe literature, assuming a shared understanding of this word. However, it is crucial to definecurricula since they are not ahistorical or apolitical. Like knowledge, curricula are sociallyconstructed and reflect the ideologies of those in power [15]–[18]. Dei [18] insists that thecurriculum is “a social construction
. Similarly, ACCESS students appear to haveincreased their confidence in being able to approach a faculty or staff member to get assistancewith academic problems between the 2021 and 2022 surveys. This result may be explained bythe changing population of ACCESS students. All 2021 survey respondents were in their firstyear of the ACCESS program, while among 2022 survey respondents some students were intheir first and other in their second year of the ACCESS program. The variation of time in theACCESS program, along with the natural maturity gained by completing another year of collegeand life, may explain some of the increase.Future work may include augmenting the survey with additional questions related to the sense ofbelonging. Furthermore, we plan
agreed to take part.Moreover, no information was collected regarding their ethnicity, race, sexual orientation, etc.,which would have broadened the study and helped to explain the sense of belonging of theparticipants in greater depth.In the future, the objective is to conduct interventions in the classroom in order to investigatehow sense of belonging changes as a result of these interventions. The planned interventionsinclude increasing student-centered activities and promoting inclusion in the classroom throughawareness-raising workshops, among other similar initiatives. In addition, it is the intention ofthe authors of this study to design a pilot mentoring program with which to empower women CEstudents.AcknowledgementsThe authors would like
Paper ID #37342Talking Tech: How Language Variety in Engineering Curriculum InstructionCan Ease Delivery and Engage StudentsIngrid Scheel, Oregon State University Ingrid Scheel is a Project Instructor at Oregon State University. She works to teach from an integrated sociotechnical perspective in engineering science and design courses. Her focus is systems engineering and program management. Scheel has experience in small business strategic planning and risk assessment, designing and deploying fiber optic sensors and sensing systems, prototype development, instrumentation, data acquisition and analysis, and reporting
to communicate effectively. However, there arefewer centers catering specifically to the needs of engineering students [12] and resources areoften allocated to undergraduate writing instruction [7]. More importantly, the tutoring can bevery different between multilingual writers and English-native writers [13]. Silva [14] foundthat multilingual writers’ writing processes (planning, reviewing) and products (fluency,quality) were distinctive from their English-native peers. Moreover, for graduate studentswho need discipline-specific support, having a tutor with limited academic writing experiencein that field will likely face resistance for giving discipline-inappropriate advice [15]. As aresult of doubt in tutors’ domain-specific knowledge
more to students [e.g., FGP21 De, Female; FGP41 Ad, Male]. In preparation for making faculty aware of students and their needs, the students also suggested educating faculty about identifying students in distress, which aligns with recommendations from Wilson et al. [50]. • Encouraging co-curricular activities and practices: Students suggested that curricular and co-curricular planning include efforts to build social connections (e.g., interactions among peers and faculty). Students also suggested that faculty could take the initiative to engage in non-academic activities (e.g., teambuilding exercises, games, etc.) with students to provide some relief from their academic responsibilities