level. To address these objectives, a self-administered questionnaire was employed, adapted, and validated for the context of engineeringstudents in Chile. The questionnaire covers the perception of incorporating gender perspectivesin a higher education institution across three dimensions: (1) Institutional sensitivity to genderperspectives, (2) Integration of gender perspectives into the curriculum, and (3) Awareness ofgender inequalities in the classroom. The results allow for the characterization of the sample'sperception regarding incorporating gender perspectives into their engineering educationprograms. Furthermore, it is worth noting that statistically significant differences exist betweenthe perceptions of men and women concerning the
fromundergraduate engineering majors that included 197 women and 211 men revealed that (1) for all students, as bothGPA and CSE increased, Growth Creative Mindset (GCM) or the belief that creativity can be cultivated increased. (2)women were less likely than the men to have a Fixed Creative Mindset (FCM), or the belief that creativity cannot beimproved, (3) CSE had no effect on FCM for women, but for men, as CSE increased the belief that creativity cannotbe improved also increased, (4) for women, progression in the engineering major, and for both groups, succeeding tothe senior year contributed to the increased belief that engineering is a creative field.IntroductionCreativity within engineering is integral to the profession and diversity is crucial to
preparing students for the jobs needed in the twenty-first century [1]. Accordingto one study, students with positive experiences in primary education STEM subjects are morelikely to pursue STEM at a different level [2]. In addition, females have a much lowerrepresentation than males do across typical STEM subjects. Learning STEM subjects is apathway to good jobs, and those jobs are important to the American economy [4].Achievement gaps in STEM among gender groups and the underrepresentation of females inthese fields should be addressed if the United States is to meet its educational goals [3]. Over thepast thirty years, women have made substantial educational gains in male-dominated STEMfields and careers. However, a gender imbalance still remains
an activity where students can explore the concepts of beauty andelegance and their relationship with engineering and the students' own interests. Part of thepurview of many first-year engineering (FYE) seminars and other introductory courses is to helpstudents understand the field of engineering in more depth and to help students appreciate howthey can connect with and be successful in engineering. Some incoming students viewengineering as job-focused and transactional or have been directed into engineering fields awayfrom career paths more traditionally associated with self-expression, to increase their futureearnings or career stability. The National Academy of Engineers’ Changing the Conversation [1]suggests that perceptions of
design. Students are graded based on whether or not they met certain minimumcriteria. While oftentimes they far exceed these criteria, the focus of grading is on a cleardemonstration and application of sound engineering principles. From a competition standpoint, Ihave shown below a sample scoring sheets I used to rank the teams for the pressure rocket: Low score is best Team 1 Team 2 Team 3 Team 4 Team 5 Max Size (dimensions exceeded) 5 Colors/style (teams ranked) 5 Kid appeal (teams ranked) 10 Ease of use for
barriers exist for minoritized students in a solid mechanicscourse?Sampling for this project included 50 students who took the course during the Fall 2021-Spring2023 academic years. The case study unit is the students who took the course at this time with thesame teaching assistant.Literature ReviewFor the purposes of this study, we explored literature related to second and third-year engineeringcourses and the success of minoritized engineering students. Literature shows that successfulengineers require a diverse range of knowledge and skills that extend beyond what is typicallytaught in engineering programs [1]. Future engineers should have professional practiceopportunities in real-world team-based settings to become collaborative and
education community, especially for instructors who have recently started teaching acourse with a laboratory or large design project.IntroductionLaboratory experiences are a form of experiential learning and a common component ofundergraduate STEM education. They provide valuable experiences for students, who benefit byconnecting the theories learned in class to practice in the laboratory. In the laboratory, studentsalso have opportunities for design, problem solving, and exposure to real-world issues that arenot usually present in traditional hand-written homework assignments [1]. However, to operateeffective laboratories, engineering departments and colleges must address challenges such asbudget constraints, space limitations, class size, and
our own experiences in the classroom.MotivationStudents’ sense of belonging in an academic setting can be impacted by feelings of vulnerabilitythat accompany the transition into higher education. Specifically, it’s common for studentsentering the college or university setting to have anxieties pertaining to being judged by othersand/or to experience a wavering sense of self [1]. Story sharing has the potential to createconnections between students that foster empathy, build relationships, break down barriers, andpromote inclusivity [2]. In addition, story sharing also has the power to change perspectives andchallenge biases [3]. When students hear stories from different perspectives, cultures, orexperiences, it broadens their understanding of
support, as well as infrastructure [1]. Engineering education must preparestudents to be innovative members of society that are able to create products that positively impacta diverse society. Transformational curricular changes in first-year introductory classes thatinclude EML and DEI can have a positive impact on students’ and institutions’ DEI efforts.Engineering education reform researchers that teach biomedical and mechanical engineeringcourses have developed and incorporated modules in their classroom that empower engineeringstudents to become champions for DEI [1] [2] [3]. This prepares engineering students for work ina diverse workforce and prepares them to be innovative with high societal impact.The Kern Engineering Entrepreneurial
) thatoverall productivity decreases because of tariffs due to decreased international trade does emergefrom the game.IntroductionCourseThe Global Engineering Course has been a required component of the engineering curriculumsince the inception of Engineering at the University of XX in 2010. Except for the Spring 2020and 2021 trips, which were cancelled due to COVID, every cohort has worked on an engineeringproject in an international setting for at least a week in countries such as Belize, Nigeria, and theUnited Arab Emirates [1], [2].In addition to the engineering field experience, students have sixty-five minutes of lecture andsixty-five minutes of lab per week during a 15-week spring semester. Each of the two modulesdescribed in this paper are
examples of how they are used in classroomenvironments.Introduction and MotivationIn the ever-evolving landscape of engineering education, the quest for fair and effectivegrading practices has become a topic of interest. The idea of "Grading for Equity," as JoeFeldman defines it in his book of the same name from 2019, lies at the core of thisauthor’s endeavor to change their grading practices. This approach transcends traditionalgrading norms, advocating for practices that are not only mathematically accurate butalso bias-resistant and motivational, ultimately geared toward fostering meaningfullearning experiences for students. [1]Traditional grading systems have several positive features that contribute to effectivecommunication within the
underrepresentedand marginalized groups. Finally, we discuss the implications these findings have for preparinggraduate students to mentor in higher education settings.Keywords: Graduate Student Mentor, Engineering Education, Culturally Responsive Pedagogyand Practices, Academic Wheel of PrivilegeIntroductionGraduate student mentors play a crucial role in the professional and personal growth ofundergraduate engineering students, particularly due to the limited availability faculty have forone-on-one interactions with them [1], [2]. Among the array of tasks they take up in their roles,graduate student mentors are known to provide direct training and support to their undergraduatestudent mentees, function as midlevel managers between the students and the
[1]. Today, manyfirst-year students typically have little hands-on experience related to engineering [2]. Manyhave never used common tools before and do not know how common devices, such as carengines, actually work. Stephen Belkoff, an engineering professor at Johns Hopkins, noted thelack of practical skills for incoming freshmen, “These are all A students, and it took two days tobuild a shelf from Home Depot and get it @$$-backwards” [3]. While they are generally verycomputer savvy, incoming freshmen have little experience with engineered equipment. Studentsdo get experience with equipment in a variety of labs and in their capstone projects during thecourse of their college careers, but neither of these may be with actual equipment used
Tsai4, Han Na Suh5, Bo Hyun Lee6, Anna Nguyen2, Andrew Lenway2, & Diana Mathis7 1 University of Missouri, Columbia; 2University of North Dakota; 3University of Denver; 4 University of Northern Colorado; 5Georgia State University; 6Ohio State University; 7Purdue University Engineering is critical to our nation’s global competitiveness, and the demand to fillengineering jobs is projected to grow over the next decade (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics,2018). To meet this demand, efforts are needed to broaden the involvement of underrepresentedracial minorities (URM) in engineering. Latine are one of the largest racial/ethnic group in theU.S. today, estimated to comprise 19.1
growth rate for studies of high school computing averaged over 40% duringthe past decade. While that research has some indicators of being increasingly focused on equity,there are also substantial gaps. For example, while publications that include student disabilitystatus have been increasing, the number still remains very low (fewer than 5%). And while moststudies adhere to the practices of high quality research (e.g., specifying a research question), thereis some room for improvement.Implications: Awareness of the landscape of recent computing education research that focuses onhigh school students will enable education researchers to align their efforts with the needs of allstudents, including those who are less likely to study computing.1
open-ended responses from the pre-test (n= 623) and post-test (n= 296)surveys. We analyzed students’ perspectives on 1) their preferred and least favored aspects of theengineering course and 2) their anticipated professions. We also conducted a quantitativeanalysis on the connections between student demographic data and their consideration of futureengineering careers.Results discuss five emergent themes impacting students’ engagement in pre-college engineeringcourses: Projects, Engineering Design Process, Flexibility and Creativity, Assignment andWriting, Timeframe. We also noted a significant increase in students’ interest in engineering inthe post-test, especially for female students. Strengthening pre-college engineering education toassist
warning for the implications of currentteaching methods.Introduction:In a traditional technical engineering class, there are lectures where content is delivered,recitations where material is reviewed in small groups, and problem sets where students cementtheir knowledge of course material by solving homework problems. It is well known thatlecture-based courses are not the best way for students to learn [1]. However, most instructorsstill teach this way [2], many assuming that motivated students will master content as they solvehomework problems, regardless of delivery method. Students largely agree, most frequentlyciting assignments and assessments — such as homework problems — as influencers of theirlearning methodology [3].Well-defined
programs, achieving high effectiveness andfosters the achievement of set goals.IntroductionEfficiently managing large educational STEM programs, particularly interdisciplinary projects,requires a harmonious blend of team dynamics and individual personality strengths [1]. Theseprojects bring together experts from divergent disciplines to collaborate towards common goals,making the team set up a critical determinant of success. While much attention has been givento factors like team composition, size, and tenure, the impact of team members’ personality traitson overall team effectiveness remains unexplored.Interdisciplinary Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) projects involvecollaboration across multiple disciplines to address
academic environment. We used thematicanalysis of the transcripts from 13 focus groups and 1 interview to examine the advisor-adviseerelationship as experienced by 31 students who identify as neurodiverse in graduate STEMprograms. The findings from this research highlighted several themes related to the importanceof communication in the relationship between neurodiverse students and their advisor. Thispaper focuses on three themes related to communication: Mutual Trust, Clear Expectations, andDelivery of Feedback. The findings suggest that these three elements of communication mayeither promote or hinder the success of neurodiverse graduate students in STEM programs,impacting disclosure of neurodiversity-related diagnoses, self-esteem, self
understanding of its structure and purpose. Below is a detaileddescription of the rubric that has been recontextualized from its original application inmanufacturing to its broader use in inclusive STEM education. The rubric is structured into threeprimary sections—Head, Heart, and Hands—each representing critical facets of the learningexperience and corresponding to cognitive engagement, emotional engagement, and activeparticipation. Our application of the 3H model[1] is rooted Piaget’s constructivist learningtheories[2], Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development[3], brain-based learning like that ofSmilkstein[4], self-efficacy[5], and cultural responsive teaching[6].Head (Cognitive Engagement): This section of the rubric focuses on self-efficacy
not only produced outstanding results in terms of student engagement anddesire to pursue an engineering degree but has also shown sustained improvements in retentionof five to seven percent. Institutions of higher education have received increasing criticism forattracting students to campus, only to leave many students feeling they don’t belong and lookingfor the exit shortly after arriving. Many factors contribute to a student’s sense of belonging,which studies have shown has a positive impact on retention as well as mental health [1].Significantly, this has been found to be true of not just traditional students, but also ofunderrepresented students who are first generation, low income, and racially minoritized [2]. Asall universities and
enrichinglearning experiences that prepare students for the challenges of the modern engineering landscape.Keywords: Chemical engineering education, desk-scale experiments, flow characterization,pumps, valves, blended learning, curriculum development, student learning outcomes, educationaltransformation.1. IntroductionIn today's digital age, the integration of blended and online learning modalities has becomeincreasingly important in engineering education. This adoption contributes to workforcedevelopment and broadening participation in engineering by enhancing scalability [1]–[3],improving student performance [4]–[6] and skills development [2], [7], [8], and ensuring thecontinuity and accessibility of engineering education in diverse contexts [2], [9
into accessible forms. Tactile graphics translate visual images into physical, three-dimensional models that aBLV person can feel, similar to braille [1]. For pedagogical content, these are usually slightlyraised graphics on a paper medium for practicality and portability ([2], [3]). Translating visualcontent into a tactile graphic requires reducing the content into just the most important features,and often requires sighted subject matter expertise ([4]–[6]). Other work has explored usinglarger, higher fidelity three-dimensional models ([7], [8]). Additionally, few tools exist for BLVpeople to create their own visual content, and most tactile graphic systems require a sightedperson’s assistance ([9]–[11]). These methods also have
engineering education can benefit from having engineeringstudents work on team projects that involve a blend of cross-disciplinary and mixed-agedcollaborations. An NSF-funded project set out to explore this idea by partnering undergraduateengineering students enrolled in a 300-level electromechanical systems course with preserviceteachers enrolled in a 400-level educational technology course to plan and deliver roboticslessons to fifth graders at a local school. Working in small teams, students designed, built, andcoded bio-inspired robots. The collaborative activities included: (1) training with HummingbirdBit hardware (Birdbrain Technologies, Pittsburgh, PA) (e.g. sensors, servo motors) and codingplatform, (2) preparing robotics lessons for fifth
grow [1],because as class sizes increase, administering assessments becomes increasingly resourceintensive [2] requiring faculty and course staff to commit increased amounts and energy towardsmanaging the logistics of exam administration [3]. The additional resources required foradministering assessments in courses with larger enrollments often lead to a decrease in thenumber and type of assessments used in a course [4, 5], with faculty often relying on assessmentpractices that are not educationally beneficial to students [6].Managing assessment for large-enrollment courses is a challenge that many engineering programsface. In response to these challenges, in Fall 2014, the Grainger College of Engineering at theUniversity of Illinois at Urbana
uncomfortable making mistakes in class, learned to use my own mistakes to model engineeringpractices, and re-framed my perspective on what it means to be a “good” engineering instructor.This work illustrates the benefits of incorporating reflective practice into the professionaldevelopment of engineering instructors.IntroductionSeveral reform pedagogies require students to grapple with confusion in the classroom, framingconfusion as a positive indication of progress towards understanding [1]. For example, inproductive failure [2], students grapple with a complex problem, initially explore incorrect solutionpaths, and eventually, with help from their instructor, collaboratively consolidate their work intothe canonically correct solution. Responsive
entrepreneurial efforts successfully. This concept is critical in the business world. Itplays a crucial role in initiating and developing new ventures, which is essential for economicgrowth, innovation, job creation, and individual empowerment. Fostering and supportingentrepreneurial intention is critical for developing a prosperous and dynamic society [1].Entrepreneurial IntentionEntrepreneurial intention (EI) is a key concept in entrepreneurship research, focusing on the factorsinfluencing the decision to start a business. This decision is often based on deliberate reasoningthat mediates between personal reasons and actions, shaped by various internal and external factors[3]. EI represents an individual's inclination to initiate and develop a new
in their own ways.Dr. Benjamin Ahn, The Ohio State University Dr. Benjamin Ahn is an Associate Professor at The Ohio State University in the Department of Engineering Education. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 Re-imagining Behavioral Analysis in Engineering Education: A Theoretical Exploration of Reasoned Action ApproachIntroductionAs a discipline, Engineering Education continues to expand its reach, and subsequently, itsmethods of analysis. Integrating research from the behavioral sciences and psychology hasenhanced researchers’ capacities to explore the intricate and multifaceted behaviors inherent toengineering practice and education [1], [2], [3]. These
Engineering Schools, Departments and Programs [1],the overall average retention rate for obtaining an engineering degree within 6 years was 55.9%.According to the 2021 NSF National Survey of College Graduates [2], only 65% of science andengineering college graduates had an occupation related to their highest degree. Putting this intoperspective, if 100 students enrolled in an engineering program, about 55.9% (~56 students) willcomplete the degree within six years. Of those ~56 students, 65% (~36 graduates) will enter theengineering workforce. In summary about one-third (1/3) of students who enroll in engineeringprograms will complete the degree within six years AND enter the engineering workforce.What about the other two-thirds (2/3)? Why are they
Students, Self-Efficacy, STEM identity, Engineering Design Process, informaleducationIntroductionSTEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math) education is a critical component ofmodern education and workforce, as it provides students with the skills and knowledge necessaryto succeed in today’s rapidly changing technological landscape, but it is not always accessible toeveryone. The equity gap in STEM education is a significant issue, and individuals from low-income communities often lack the STEM experiences that their more affluent peers receive [1].To address this gap, educators are exploring new ways to engage students in STEM experiencesthat promote positive associations. A positive class experience can impact students in profoundways, for