the thought policing.This participant seemed in conflict with the ideas that were presented during thevignette-based HC survey and expressed frustration. He thinks that women do not gointo engineering only because they choose not to, which is related to the first conceptionthat systemic discrimination (a form of HC) is not an issue, yet the experiences andstatistics of marginalized individuals in engineering argue otherwise. The participantdoes not account for gender stereotypes and influences that impact women’s choices togo into engineering, such as the influence of family, peer groups, and societal/culturalgender stereotypes on the attraction of adolescent boys to STEM-related subjects andemphasis on their performance [48]. The participant
, University of Virginia Professional Skills and Safety are my main pedagogical interests. I use the Chemical Engineering labora- tory to implement safety training to improve safety culture, and to adapt assessment methods to enhance development of students’ professional skills. I am an Assistant Professor of Chemical Engineering at the University of Virginia and I hold a B.Sc. (University of Saskatchewan) and Ph.D. in Chemical En- gineering (Queen’s University). Complimenting my pedagogical research is an interest in bioprocess engineering, environmental engineering, environmental risk management, and I have authored more than 40 peer reviewed publications in these fields. I’m also active in developing workforce
my classes. I can easily reach out to most people.”Values, Attitudes, and BeliefsThe focus group participants clearly expressed the attitude that CEE has played an enduring rolein the chemical engineering community, both historically and currently, with one participantdescribing CEE as a “needed place." Several participants expressed the value that CEE was auseful source of ideas for lessons, courses, and programs that faculty members can use ininstruction and share with colleagues. They also expressed the belief that the journal, as a peer-reviewed resource for content that is specific to the discipline, is used in practice, citing that, “itserves a really important role as both a research and a practice journal.” In addition, they
the historical focus on individual problem solving, it is traditionally expected that everyteam member strives toward excellence in all skills involved in the project, such as writing, oralpresentation, and analysis. However, in the collaborative problem-solving paradigm, there is ageneral understanding that students can contribute to projects in a way that is more tailored totheir skills and interests. By promoting this approach, a culture of collaboration, innovation andinclusion in engineering education and the profession is fostered. This shift in focus should alsoinclude flexible teaching and evaluation methods that recognize that different students learndifferently [14].A Theory of Change for an Engineering DepartmentThe NSF
with my time until the very end. I felt as though I started early enough but towards the end, I started to become rushed which is unpleasant when you want to do your best in the creation of this design. I would change the amount of work and the kind of work I will do in the session I work. At first, I was just doing the fun stuff like coming up with ideas and working on rough prototypes which left all the harder report writing for the end. In the future I would like to more evenly balance these two aspects of many projects.”4.2 Flexing the creativity muscleFor reasons such as the open-ended nature of this project as well as sufficiently structured stepsinvolved in the
characteristics that they believe are representative of anengineering educator. This adoption and emulation of attitudes, behaviors and practices – in allforms of linguistic and symbolic units – serve the purpose of being recognized as engineeringeducators by peers, mentors, professors, and those who are part of the world of engineering [38,39]. Thus, we posit that current discourses and practices of doctoral engineering students in theclassroom, as they engage in teaching, are a representation of the current culture of engineering.That is, doctoral engineering students enact overt and subtle behaviors learned and adopted inengineering spaces throughout their undergraduate and doctoral programs such as a sense ofsuperiority in their ability to solve
reference lists can be another way to discover other researchers from diverse backgrounds.AuditingAuditing citations at several points in the research process is important, especially as citationsoften change in the editing and peer review process. The UMD research guide to citation justicelinks to a basic spreadsheet template that can be used for in depth auditing [23]. Keeping trackof citation composition using a spreadsheet allows the audit to be in-depth and thorough,although it can be time consuming. Codes have also been developed to analyze the gender andethnic makeup of a bibliography and can provide an overview audit in a fraction of the time. It isimportant to keep in mind, however, that these codes are far from precise and are based
master’s was in engineer- ing education at UNESCO chair on Engineering Education at the University of Tehran. I pursue Human adaptation to technology and modeling human behavior(with machine learning and cognitive research). My background is in Industrial Engineering (B.Sc. at the Sharif University of Technology and ”Gold medal” of Industrial Engineering Olympiad (Iran-2021- the highest-level prize in Iran)). Now I am work- ing as a researcher in the Erasmus project, which is funded by European Unions (1M $ European Union & 7 Iranian Universities) which focus on TEL and students as well as professors’ adoption of technol- ogy(modern Education technology). Moreover, I cooperated with Dr. Taheri to write the ”R
project were committed to creating products that were not only effective but also socially responsible as well as economic for purchase having quick economic and investment paybacks.- 5: An ability to function effectively on a team whose members together provide leadership, create a collaborative and inclusive environment, establish goals, plan tasks, and meet objectives. Each MVP was developed by a team of three or four electrical and computer engineering students. The teams worked together to ensure that all aspects of the product, from design to construction, were integrated and aligned with their overall goals. Team members knew that they would be peer reviewed by one another based on the contribution
issues associated with it. Students must redesign the part while preserving functionality to be suitable for both mass-production CNC machining and another manufacturing method dictated by the instructor (such as casting). It must be tested for failure at a specified load via finite element analysis and then simulated for safe, error-free production in Fusion 360 with a limit on maximum total machining time. Afterward, the student will write a short report including a cost analysis of before and after the redesign.This example would integrate CAD, CAE, and CAM into a single project. As a result, thestudent would need to consider multiple objectives during design: purpose, external loading, andmanufacturing
teaching is primarily in team-based engineering courses, and her research fo- cuses on equity in communication and collaboration as well as in group design decision making (judg- ment) under uncertainty. She is especially interested in how power relationships and rhetorical strate- gies affect group judgment in engineering design; one goal of this work is to to understand factors that inhibit full participation of students who identify with historically marginalized groups and investigate evidence-based strategies for mitigating these inequities. In addition, she is interested in technology and how specific affordances can change the ways we collaborate, learn, read, and write. Teaching engineer- ing communication
and breaking down professional silos and isolation in healthcare communitieshas led to the use of virtual communities of practice among other professions, such as ineducation and scientific research.Similar to healthcare professionals, education professionals have also experienced barriersassociated with professional silos and isolation. In particular, faculty at research-intensiveuniversities can hold alternative titles and roles within the institution, which can lead to differentperceptions among their faculty peers and students [7]. For instance, faculty on the tenure trackwith a higher research and lower teaching focused role will have the title “Professor”, whereasthose who have a more teaching focused role can be given the title
be included,conducted by the instructor, to examine how the technology sector is developing mechanismsand procedures to avoid these types of failures – specifically by building diversity and inclusioninto the engineering design process. Student engagement and feedback will be enhancedthrough the use of online discussion forums (which can be asynchronous) in which students arerequired to comment on particular case studies and engage with their peers as they analyze thecauses of failure.Specific reading assignments for the DIV learning module include excerpts from "TheAlignment Problem" by Brian Christian (12), "Technically Wrong" by Sara Wachter-Boettcher(13), and “Race after Technology” by Ruha Benjamin (14). These are critically acclaimed
University, Mankato Dr. Darcie Christensen is a probationary Assistant Professor in the Department of Integrated Engineering at Minnesota State University Mankato. She teaches for Iron Range Engineering, which is located at the Minnesota North Campus in Virginia, MN. Dr. Christensen received her Ph.D. in Engineering Education from Utah State University in the Summer of 2021. The title of her Dissertation is ”A Mixed-Method Approach to Explore Student Needs for Peer Mentoring in a College of Engineering.” Darcie holds a Master of Engineering degree in Environmental Engineering (2019) and Bachelor of Science degree in Biological Engineering (2017), both from Utah State University. She is passionate about student success
practice interview skills she had been observing and practicing prior to actuallyconducting one for the project.Interview purposeFinally, there are several interview purposes, which are largely informed by qualitative researchmethodologies. Here, we provide some examples of common types of research interviews,though this list is not exhaustive. One common interview type is the cognitive interview which isused to elicit data on participants’ responses and interpretations of specific stimuli or situations[14]. One recent work-in-progress study is using cognitive interviews to assess peer reviewingamong EER mentored groups [35]. Related to the cognitive interview process is the think-aloudinterview (TAI), which can be used to explore how participants
Your Intended Major?Engineering, Biomedical Engineering, Industrialand System Engineering, Computer Engineering 10%& Computer Science, Electrical Engineering, ElecEOther Engineering Major NOT Listed Above, or 10%Other Major that is Not Engineering. The last two Bi mEoptions allowed participants to write-in responses. 10% 60% Ma eE ChemEOne participant selected Electrical Engineering 10%(labeled in Figure 3 as ElecE), 1 participant MechEselected Biomedical Engineering (labeled inFigure 3 as BiomE), 1 participant selectedMechanical
arespectful term for “interested parties.” Jennifer Tauli Corpuz, from the Kankana-ey Igorot People of MountainProvince in the Philippines, and Stanley Kimaren ole Riamit, an Indigenous peoples’ leader from the PastoralistsMaasai Community in southern Kenya, write a blog on how they are rights holders of their land, not stakeholdersthat need to negotiate their priorities [12], therefore making “stakeholders” a colonial and violent word forindigenous peoples. This change in language has also been adopted by the Center for Disease Control, IndigenousCorporate Training, and Lake Superior State University [13]–[15].the topic of satellite-mega constellations, which are groups of satellites that operate together tocover a vast span of the planet. We also
recitation periods, lecture periods,and assessment periods. During a recitation period lecture was forbidden, lectures were limited to oneclass period every two weeks, and assessment was done once every two weeks as well. Biweeklyassessments suggested organizing the course in two-week modules, each one emphasizing a certain topic.The lectures and assessments could be held in a large lecture hall while recitations were limited in size toaccommodate the flipped portion of the class. For larger numbers of students, the number of recitationsections increased while lecture and assessment accommodated all students at the same time. Forassessment this practice made common exams possible, minimizing the effort required for writing thoseexams. The course
and continuousimprovement. A paper was presented at the 2021 ASEE Annual Conference that introduced theframework developed for this program; this is the second paper in the sequence that will share theimplementation of the assessment process and assessment results from the first two years of theprogram.The purpose of this paper is threefold: a) to communicate the process of implementation of theframework developed to effectively assess the student learning outcomes using a learningmanagement system for continuous improvement, b) to share the results of the assessment fromthe first two years of the coursework, and c) to share best practices with peer institutions planningto offer a new degree program in Engineering Technology or similar
context.This work uses this operationalization of interest with the understanding that both interest andidentity are not static, rather participants write and rewrite their personal narrative of who theywere, are, and want to be as they evaluate their changing interests [29], [30], [33], [37]. Weextend the current understanding of interest to move beyond the “strength” of an overallengineering interest to include a more nuanced, disciplinary approach. Primary interest refers tothe initial engineering major that engineering students declared when they started their program.When considering how interests change, this establishes a starting focus for participants.Additional disciplinary interest is used to delineate interests that are beyond students
]. While other participating institutions did the same, including the author of thispublication [1], the authors went on to publish a peer-reviewed article on their findings [18]. Intheir study of business faculty teaching needs, Ireland, Thompson, and Bourke found threethemes: textbooks and course materials, the role of technology and motivation. They also foundthat the concepts of “time as a barrier and the desire to improve” as additional themes that werewoven through the discussions of the other three main themes. This paper was based on findingsfrom the same multi-site study the author of this paper participated in with business faculty atUB. What is worth noting is that the Ireland et al. paper also included Computer Science facultyin their
design competition revealed increasedsatisfaction amongst students, faculty, and industry partners. Following this, the TRUE modelwas adopted as part of the capstone design.In the summer of 2020, only two types of capstone projects were encouraged: (a) TRUEprojects and (b) Student-initiated projects that were reviewed and approved by a facultycommittee through a proposal system. By Spring 2023 (as of the writing of this work-in-progress paper), all capstone design projects in the department of EE have been converted tofit the TRUE project model, which means all capstone projects are real-world projects withindustry/community sponsors/partnerships. While this significant shift has been driven byanecdotal experiences shared by various stakeholders
-specific needs as they worked the project (as ofthis writing, a third and fourth cohort, each consisting of 7 states, are engaging in the CMP).States vary in data capacity and in policy structure (see Tab. 1). For example, most of the cohort1 states have a decentralized model where curricular and course decisions are made at the districtor school level with little influence from the state. In cohort 2, most of the states operate within atop-down approach where curriculum and graduation requirements are set at the state level.Table 1: State data capacity at baselineState features (at baseline) Cohort 1 Cohort 2 (n=6
Opportunity Identification and Problem Definition Work Time (Students continue with opportunity identification and also work on problem definition, i.e., write problem statement and POVs, define design requirements and criteria.)5 1 Hands-on Skills Session: Electrical Fundamental and Circuits (Students acquire and practice the skills of building circuits.) 2 Hands-on Skills Session: Arduino, Sensors, and Actuators (Students learn to work with Arduino and a few commonly used sensors and actuators.)6 1 Hands-on Skills Session: Engineering Models, Visual Models, Technical Drawing, 3D
environments for mathematics education that rely heavily on students’ own comprehension processes for self-evaluation and self-directed learning (so-called unintelligent tutoring systems). Prof. Nathan has authored over 100 peer-reviewed publications, given more than 120 presen- tations at professional meetings, and has secured over $25M in research funds to investigate and improve STEM learning, reasoning and instruction. Among his projects, Dr. Nathan directed the IERI-funded STAAR Project, which studied the transition from arithmetic to algebraic reasoning, served as Co-PI for ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2023
or deviant (i.e., outlier) cases, the participants expressed markedly differentperceptions than their peers about mentorship. Each called into question or doubted whether theirexperiences should be labeled as mentorship. These were not anticipated responses fromparticipants choosing to participate in a study about effective mentorship [7], [8]. While otherparticipants shared negative stories or gave examples of ineffective mentorship, none expressedreluctance or refusal to label their support relationships as mentorship. The seeminglycontradictory combination of providing mentorship while questioning or invalidating one’s ownmentorship experiences motivated a closer examination of these faculty members’ stories todetermine what lessons could
Education, 2023 Work In Progress: A Novel Approach to Understanding Perceptions of Race Among Computing UndergraduatesINTRODUCTIONBlack, Native American, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, and Latinx undergraduates remainseverely underrepresented in computing [i.e., computer science (CS), engineering, andinformation systems] [1]. This is often attributed to student-centered, deficit-based factors suchas a lack of access to K-12 computing courses, culturally relevant role models and curricula, andsense of belonging. However, research notes how racial “othering” in university courses,departments, and cultures from peers, faculty, and staff negatively impact them [2]–[4].Shifting national conversations around race, racism, and anti
role in their decision to persist in or leaveengineering [26-29]. Female-identified students’ sense of belonging and self-confidence have asignificant impact on their persistence [24, 30]. Engineering identity also strongly contributes tostudents’ desires to stay in the field [31-33]. Students who are more interested in and motivatedby the social impact of engineering do not always identify as engineers [25] because of theemphasis on technical engineering work [13]. This is especially concerning in light of recentevidence suggesting that female-identified students place more importance on the sociotechnicaldimensions of engineering than their male-identified peers [23, 34]. Providing students withmore opportunities to engage with socially
necessary to obtain their preferred FPAG. Example Acted on opportunities Knew that resume Knew of potential Behaviors such as internships/co- systems can be resources but chose not ops. automated but does not to use them. No clear Began the process change their approach in decision on preferred early, including writing. FPAG. sophomore year. Asked questions of key socializers such as career counselors and faculty. 2) High