than either the ASI or Neosexism scale [85], [86], [87], two of the original fourscales used in the pilot study, so the SATW replaced both as a measure of explicit sexismIn order to include data on implicit bias, two items were added to the collection instrumentdirecting respondents to complete the online Project Implicit association tests for Gender -Science (IAT-GC) and Gender - Career (IAT-GS) and to report their final scores on each, asreported to them by the instrument [88]. Data were converted to a 5-point response scale forstatistical analysis. Notably, the validity of the IAT scores is dependent on data that reside in theProject Implicit database, so internal consistency of the reported scores for the Gender – CareerImplicit
. In the mid-1970s, David Kolb published works thatcategorized human learning styles and how they respond to various types of experientiallearning.2 At least three out of Kolb’s four learning styles benefitted most through “concreteexperience” and “active experimentation.”2 Furthermore, Schumann, et. al., reported that manystudents who leave engineering do so because of a lack of interest in the topics.3 In 2010, in aneffort to increase retention rates among engineering programs, the National Science Foundationsponsored a project called “Engage.”4 One of the three objectives of this project is to increaseretention by “Integrating into coursework everyday examples in engineering (E3s).”4 Also, asampling of recent papers that studied the
managed a European Social Fund Project in Women in Engineering contributing to widening participation and inclusion of women engineers, developed and ran world-class innovative aca- demic practice methods in Career Development, Employability and designed and managed staff workload models. Since 2014, Jo˜ao developed and led transnational education partnerships in several countries in south East Asia and led a group of institutions under the group Star Education based in Singapore as Executive c American Society for Engineering Education, 2020 Paper ID #28870 Dean and Senior Vice President. His
insights into the potential importance of socioculturalinterventions within engineering classrooms to improve the engineering climate, engagement, andretention of women and Black, Latino/a/x, and Indigenous (BLI) students. INTRODUCTION This research paper investigates predictors of engineering identity at the beginning of afirst-year engineering course as part of a larger project to understand continued enrollment inengineering courses. Retaining interested undergraduate students in engineering tracks requires aclear understanding of the predictors and influences on continued enrollment in engineeringcourses. Particularly, the retention of women of all races/ethnicities, and students who identify
, foster motivation and psychological growth. These psychological needs areautonomy, competence, and relatedness. Autonomy involves being and acting in harmony withone's integrated sense of self and values as well as feeling that one has ownership over one’sactions. In educational environments, autonomy is visible when learning environments offerlearners opportunities for choice, self-direction, and flexibility rather than imposing strict or rigiddirection and demands. Learners are thus motivated when they have choice in their academicpathways, courses, learning topics, classroom projects, etcetera based on their interests andaspirations. Competence involves mastering tasks and learning new skills and involves a sense ofaccomplishment derived from
M.S. in Industrial Engineering, and a Ph.D. in Engineering from the University of Arkansas. His research interest includes decision quality, resilient design, set-based design, engineering and project management, and engineering education. During his time at the University of Arkansas, Eric has served as Principal Investigator, Co-Principal Investigator, or Senior Personnel on over 40 research projects totaling over $6.6 Million, which produced over 50 publications (journal articles, book chapters, conference proceedings, newsletters, and technical reports). He is an active member of the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) and International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE) where he has served in
What’s Next? From Analysis to ActionAbstractThis paper describes how data-driven examination of barriers to successful completion ofundergraduate engineering degrees amongst female-identifying and under-represented minority(URM) students at Seattle University has shaped the development of new policies and programswithin the College of Science and Engineering to better support students from underrepresentedor marginalized groups. This study is a continuation of a project in which we first analyzedgraduation data to extract characteristics that differentiate students who do or do not successfullycomplete degrees within engineering. We followed the data analysis with a survey to betterunderstand the experiences of students from underrepresented or
society through investigating community-based leMr. William Cohen, Ohio State University William Cohen is a Lecturer for the Fundamentals of Engineering program at The Ohio State University: a 2 semester course sequence for first-year engineering students focusing on programming in MATLAB, computer aided drawing in SolidWorks, and a semester long design-build-test project. William has also received his B.S. in Chemical Engineering and M.S. in Nuclear Engineering from Ohio State.Dr. James Edward Toney, Ohio State University James Toney earned the Ph.D. in physics from Carnegie Mellon University in 1998 and the B.S. in electri- cal engineering from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in 1984. He is a Senior Lecturer in the
registered professional mechan- ical engineer with 15 years experience as a practicing engineer. She earned a BSME degree from the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, a MSME degree from the Georgia Institute of Technology, and is currently pursuing a PhD in Engineering Education at USU. She is Principal Investigator for Online Learning Forums for Improved Engineering Student Outcomes in Calculus, a research project funded by the NSF TUES program. Her research interests include engineering student learning, distance engineering education, and alternative pathways to engineering education.Dr. Joshua Marquit, Pennsylvania State University, Brandywine Joshua Marquit is an Instructor in the Psychology Department at Penn State
TechnologyDr. Eric J. AlmDr. Alison F Takemura, US Department of Energy Joint Genome Institute Alison loves wading into a good science story. Her first was her MIT doctoral thesis project, unlocking the gastronomical genome of a Vibrio bacterium. For some of the Vibrio’s meals, she collected seaweed from the rocky, Atlantic coastline at low tide. (Occasionally, its waves swept her off her feet.) During grad school, Alison was also a fellow in MIT’s Biological Engineering Communication Lab. Helping students share their science with their instructors and peers, she began to crave the ability to tell the stories of other scientists, and the marvels they discover, to a broader audience. So after graduating in 2015 with a
that most of the papers with a focus onstudent engagement (139 in total) that were published between 2003 to 2023 reported howvarious educational interventions, such as use of distinctive pedagogies (e.g., project-basedlearning [2]; service learning [3]; game-based learning [4]), could enhance student engagement.While these studies contribute to identifying effective pedagogical approaches to enhancing theengagement of students at large, they were not designed to investigate who were more, or less,engaged in the educational practice; therefore, they do not inform how those students who wereless engaged in learning could be better supported to achieve optimal learning outcomes
to four-year universities to studyengineering bring a diverse range of experiences and perspectives, which greatly contribute to thefield of engineering and help national and regional workforce development. However, thesestudents face specific challenges, referred to as the vertical transfer penalty, when they transfer tofour-year universities. This can lead to lower completion rates for community college starterscompared to students who start at four-year universities. The issue seems to be related to factorsregarding the students' experiences, institutional characteristics, and geographic location. Thisstudy marks the initial stage of a comprehensive research project aiming to compare historicaltransfer student data over the past two
the five hierarchical levels of the affective domain (seeTable 1 for details on hierarchical levels). Finally, participants were asked (Q11) which of thethree domains they preferred to learn with and why. It should be noted that this interview consistedof questions about all three domains, and the results were split into three papers to better emphasizethe findings related to each domain of learning. In this paper, we focus only on the affective domainof learning. Readers interested in understanding more about the research on cognitive andpsychomotor domain are directed to the other papers from this project [2-3].Q1: How do you perceive learning as a process?Learning is an integral part of our lives. Each one of us learns the same things
engineering and design work.Dr. Molly Y. Mollica, University of Maryland, Baltimore County Molly Y. Mollica (she/her) is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Mechanical Engineering at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County (UMBC). Dr. Mollica earned her B.S. in Biomedical Engineering from Ohio State University (OSU), M.S. in Mechanical Engineering from OSU, and Ph.D. in bioengineering at the University of Washington. She also trained as a postdoctoral scholar-fellow at Bloodworks Northwest Research Institute. Molly’s wetlab research interests are at the intersection of engineering mechanics, mechanobiology, and health equity. Her educational research interests are in community-engaged learning, project-based
focus on social justice inengineering. In environmental sciences and engineering departments, such as those at Universityof California (UC), Berkeley and UC Davis, courses on engineering’s impact on the environmentare being developed. UC Berkeley has a course called “Engineering, Environment, and Society”where students read scholarly works on social justice, examine case studies for impact andinjustice, and work with community clients on projects developing solutions to environmentalissues that disproportionately affect members of historically marginalized groups [20], [21].Hendricks et. al., provided the structure and objectives for their course “Science and Engineeringfor Social Justice,” as a blueprint for other faculty. Their course is
Paper ID #38901Student-led program to improve equity in Ph.D. oral qualifying examsMeredith Leigh Hooper, California Institute of Technology This author was an equal first author contributor to this work. Meredith Hooper is an Aeronautics PhD student studying under Professor Mory Gharib in the Graduate Aerospace Laboratories of the California Institute of Technology (GALCIT). Meredith is a National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellow, leader within the GALCIT Graduate Student Council, and Co-Director of the Caltech Project for Effective Teaching (CPET). Her PhD research uses a combination of machine learning and
took in Fall 2022 and additional dialogues with Asian and Asian-American Studies scholars. Jerry identifies as a gay East Asian-American cisgender man andengineering PhD student whose engineering education research centers on the intersections ofengineering and social justice. In developing this work, Jerry, drew on his experiences as anengineering student and personal conversations with other Asian-American engineering studentsto further sharpen the theory. antonio engages this project as a Filipino American man, highereducation scholar, and formally-educated and formerly-practicing engineer. antonio’sperspectives are derived from those identities and experiences. Sheri engages this project as awhite female academic whose is formally educated
article is to bring students’ viewpoints to the forefront in order to initiate aconversation with other entities, which will aid in the future in the construction of a “cultureof wellness” [29-30] for all.4.5 PositionalityThe first author is a cis-female international graduate student from a South Asian countrystudying in the College of Engineering. She has been working on this project for the past fewmonths, intending to increase awareness of the university and the support programs andservices. As an overseas student, she is unfamiliar with the university system, which has ledher to learn more about university support from engineering students, whom she consideredexperts in this issue. This intent likely contributed to establishing rapport and a
&M University. He is also the Assistant Lab Director at the Sketch Recognition Lab.Dr. Shawna Thomas, Texas A&M University Dr. Thomas is an Instructional Assistant Professor in the Department of Computer Science and Engineer- ing at Texas A&M University. She is a member of the Engineering Education Faculty in the Institute for Engineering Education & Innovation at Texas A&M. She enjoys project-based learning and incorporat- ing active learning techniques in all her courses. She received her Ph.D. from Texas A&M University in 2010, focusing on developing robotic motion planning algorithms and applying them to computational biology problems including protein folding. She continued this work as
Colorado Springs Valerie Martin Conley is dean of the College of Education and professor of Leadership, Research, and Foundations at the University of Colorado Colorado Springs. She previously served as director of the Center for Higher Education, professor, and department chair at Ohio University. She was the PI for the NSF funded research project: Academic Career Success in Science and Engineering-Related Fields for Female Faculty at Public Two-Year Institutions. She is co-author of The Faculty Factor: Reassessing the American Academy in a Turbulent Era.Dr. Clayton J. Clark II, Florida A&M University Dr. Clayton J. Clark II is a Professor in Civil and Environmental Engineering at Florida Agricultural &
engineers are mostly likely tohave this attitude in the results section.MethodsThis section describes our process for classifying engineers according to their acculturationattitudes, as determined by their acculturation preferences, and exploring differences in theseattitudes based on their personal and job characteristics.Participants: Data for this study was collected as part of a larger research project administered inFall 2019 [46]. Nearly twelve thousand alumni who earned engineering degrees from a large,public university in the southwestern U.S. within the past 15 years were invited to participate inan online survey via an initial invitation email and two reminder emails sent over the course of atwo-week period. All participants had the
Berkeley’s public science center, where she evaluated STEM education programs for all ages. Several studies focused on expanding diversity, access, and inclusion in pre-college engineering education, with attention to changes in participants’ skills, attitudes, and career interests. She earned her B.A. in Anthropology with a minor in Education from UC Berkeley and an M.A. in Museum Studies: Specialization in Education and Interpretation from John F. Kennedy University. Her Master’s Project focused on culturally responsive evaluation practices.Ms. Gennie Miranda, UC San Diego Gennie B. Miranda serves as the Director of Operations in the IDEA Engineering Student Center, Jacobs School of Engineering at UC San Diego, with
. Fast forward through coast-to-coast moves to Boston, San Diego and finally Rochester, Kathy spent many years in the fitness industry while raising her daughter, wearing every hat from personal trainer and cycling instructor to owner and director of Cycledelic Indoor Cycling Studio. Kathy draws upon these many diverse career and life experiences while directing WE@RIT. In the spring of 2020, Kathy earned her Master of Science degree in Program Design, Analysis & Manage- ment through RIT’s School of Individualized Study, combining concentrations in Project Management, Analytics and Research, & Group Leadership and Development. An unabashed introvert, Kathy enjoys reading and spending time with her family
York. Dr. Barry holds a Bachelor of Science degree from Rochester Institute of Tech- nology, a Master of Science degree from University of Colorado at Boulder, and a PhD from Purdue University. Prior to pursuing a career in academics, Dr. Barry spent 10-years as a senior geotechnical engineer and project manager on projects throughout the United States. He is a licensed professional en- gineer in multiple states. Dr. Barry’s areas of research include assessment of professional ethics, teaching and learning in engineering education, nonverbal communication in the classroom, and learning through historical engineering accomplishments. He has authored and co-authored a significant number of journal articles and
education and his areas of research include en- gineering design thinking, adult learning cognition, engineering education professional development and technical training. He is currently working on National Science Foundation funded projects exploring en- gineering design systems thinking and several GEAR UP STARS projects funded by the US Department of Education. He has extensive international experience working on technical training and engineering education projects funded by the Asian Development Bank, World Bank, and U.S. Department of Labor, USAID. Countries where he has worked include Armenia, Bangladesh, Bulgaria, China, Egypt, Macedo- nia, Poland, Romania, and Thailand. American
me when I assign tasks for everyone to do, despite the fact I was elected teamleader. These are personal obstacles because there is nothing [that] I can do about them as afemale.” In this instance, the participant did not know how to change others’ behaviors in orderto fight a norm that women are undervalued in engineering.Avoiding. A few participants (n = 4) avoided HC. Minoritized women were slightly more likelyto use this strategy than majority women (4% vs 1%). A Hispanic/Latina industrial engineeringundergrad stated that she had “problems with team members due to lack of communication andrespect,” which she overcame “by analyzing if the team is a [good] fit for myself and doing abetter judgment for other teamwork projects.” The
Paper ID #34921Women Electrical Engineering Faculty: How do they Experience EEDepartment Climate and Promotion and Tenure?Dr. Dawn M. Maynen, Pennsylvania State University Dr. Dawn Maynen is the Project Coordinator/ Research Analyst for the Pennsylvania State Piazza Center for Fraternity and Sorority Research. She is responsible for client interaction, survey administration, data analysis and reporting of projects. Dawn is part of the Piazza Center research team responsible for mul- tiple publications and conference presentations. Dawn has a Ph.D. in Higher Education/ Student Affairs from Indiana University-Bloomington
personal experience for me to sharewith my students, which I did, and it had a very positive effect. I think the man who originallyasked the question even sent her a thank you note for taking the time to give such a thoroughresponse.Sometimes, somebody will say to me, or near-enough that I can hear, a comment which impliesthat women are differently-abled and that this explains some feature of their presence (or lackthereof) in engineering. for example, "women in the software engineering class tend to pickprojects that involve helping people because they're more nurturing than the men". "oh, I don'tknow Guy, don't you think they pick projects the same way most students do: which one will bethe easiest or most interesting?" (Guy is a generic
our knowledge-making in lived experience, dialogue, an ethic ofcaring, and personal accountability. It is tempting, of course, to design a large-scale study toaffirm, complicate, or deny the realities of our discussion here. And perhaps we will. Yet to doso would be to embrace an epistemological foundation that fails to serve this project well. Wework instead to answer a question: What kinds of foundational knowledge or interactions cansupport enduring relationships between Black women and white women? Or, what kinds ofrelationships are needed for Black and white women’s relationships to survive intersectingsystems of oppression?Allies --> Advocates --> AccomplicesAs might be obvious given our contemporary moment, the issues we’re