writing," Chemical Engineering Education, vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 116-120, 2004.[22] D. E. Gragson and J. P. Hagen, "Developing technical writing skills in the physical chemistry laboratory: A progressive approach employing peer review," Journal of Chemical Education, vol. 87, no. 1, pp. 62-65, 2010.[23] R. Althauser and K. Darnall, "Enhancing critical reading and writing through peer reviews: An exploration of assisted performance," Teaching Sociology, pp. 23-35, 2001.[24] W. Jensen and B. Fischer, "Teaching Technical Writing through Student Peer- Evaluation," Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 95- 100, 2005/01/01 2005, doi: 10.2190/MBYG-AK7L-5CT7-54DU.[25] N.-F. Liu and D
masculinity ideology had higherodds of engineering aspirations. On the other hand, both boys and girls who haveinternalized more conventional femininity ideology regarding objectification of thefemale body were less likely to report engineering aspirations. Although this findingfluctuated in significance as we moved through the model building, the direction iscontrary to previous analyses completed with the first wave of study15. This discrepancypoints to the need for additional investigation; with our upcoming third and final wave ofdata collection we will be able to test for developmental changes in gender ideology thatcould explain differences using longitudinal methods21 which would increase the powerto detect associations. It may also be that as
diverse disciplinary approaches in a way that is bothpedagogically coherent and immediately relevant to students’ experiences.Introduction [S]ystemic engineering reform, and its [traditional] curricular and programmatic forms…, will only have limited success until the relationship between engineers’ identity and knowledge and method is fully addressed, and an integration of the liberal arts—particularly those areas dealing with the relationship between engineering and culture and politics—takes place.1This paper analyzes Rensselaer’s Product Design and Innovation (PDI) program as a potentialmodel for a new liberal education for engineering students that achieves the high level ofintegration of technical and liberal arts
and achieving certain learningoutcomes desired of engineering graduates. This paper provides preliminary analysis in thevalidation process of the E-FSSE survey that began in October, 2006 (see E-FSSE Survey inAppendix I). Thus far, three of the nine universities in the validation project have completed thesurvey, via the web. This paper provides some preliminary analysis in the validation process andnext steps. Several more validation steps are necessary before analysis is complete.IntroductionIn the wake of the National Academy of Engineering’s “Educating the Engineer of 2020” reportand the highly acclaimed National Academies’ “Rising Above the Gathering Storm” report,today’s engineering community is increasingly concerned with and attuned
2017, the course was instructed by twodoctoral graduate student instructors, and supported by undergraduate teaching assistants and asenior teaching fellow. Students have daily homework assignments, computer lab work, exams,and an engineering-related group project and final presentation. Upper-level engineeringstudents, hired as tutors, assist students each week night to provide guidance and support onhomework assignments and projects. In addition to the academic components of the FYSE program, the program seeks tocultivate community and a network of support among each FYSE cohort (see Appendix B forsample schedule). Team building is strengthened through various team-building activities, suchas a group outdoor challenge-by-choice course
AC 2007-2303: PORTRAYING THE ACADEMIC EXPERIENCES OF STUDENTSIN ENGINEERING: STUDENTS' PERCEPTIONS OF THEIR EDUCATIONALEXPERIENCES AND CAREER ASPIRATIONS IN ENGINEERING.Russell Korte, University Of Minnesota Russell F. Korte is a doctoral candidate in Human Resource Development and Strategic Management and Organization at the University of Minnesota. He is also a research assistant for the university’s Institute of Technology in collaboration with the Center for the Advancement of Engineering Education. His research interests include learning, socialization, and performance in adult education and the workplace.Karl Smith, University of Minnesota Karl A. Smith is Cooperative Learning Professor
incoming first-year students into the Pennsylvania State University community.Along with acclimating students to their chosen engineering or science-based discipline, theprogram includes structured social and cultural events that encourage students to buildrelationships with one another and relate in-class activities to out-of-class experiences. Aprimary goal of the program is to guide participants toward academic success, providing themwith a head start in the challenging yet rewarding fields of engineering. Participants, traditionallyunderrepresented students in engineering, are engaged in math preparation, metacognitive skilldevelopment, group study sessions, near-peer mentorship, professional development workshops,and community building
anddisseminate quality PIE materials and seed a nascent community of experienced PIEpractitioners. This work was guided by educators who have already established successfulinnovation and entrepreneurship programs for physics students, e.g. the Scienceworks physicsentrepreneurship bachelor’s degree program at Carthage College, the physics entrepreneurshipmaster’s (PEP) program at Case Western University, and the engineering and applied physicsprograms at Kettering University. The group’s work was also guided by an Industry AdvisoryBoard comprised of physicists with extensive experience as entrepreneurs and in private sectorcompanies.Project activity was roughly organized along three central axes: developing and disseminatingPIE curricular materials
engineering.Jean S. DeClerck, Michigan Technological University Jean Straw DeClerck has supported two National Science Foundation (NSF) grants through the design, facilitation, and ongoing improvement of ethics education instruction to science and engineering students. She is an Engaged Learning and Integrated Technology Specialist at Michigan Technological University’s Van Pelt and Opie Library. Her undergraduate studies included technical communication and mechanical engineering coursework, and she will complete her master’s of science degree in rhetorical and tech- nical communications at Michigan Tech in early 2012. Her current interests include engaged learning environments, mentorship, and the rhetorical aspects of
tool to provideculminating senior academic/intellectual experience for students, especially those at the end oftheir educational program; such a project will give E/CS students an insight into the activities theywill likely be involved in while on the job.Engineering student societies and clubs are also promising avenues to promote engagement amongstudents. These student groups/clubs may participate in hackathons, competitions, and serviceactivities, bringing a fun, hands-on factor to their engineering curriculum. Such groups promoteinteraction within minority groups and improve 'students' sense of belonging, and curbs loneliness.However, team-building skills need to be developed to ensure inclusiveness and proper leadershipand development of
in characterizing graduate-level attrition, persistence, and career trajectories; engineering writing and communication; and methodological development. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2023 Work in Progress: Toward a Holistic Understanding of Engineering Student Success in Mechanical Engineering across Educational StagesAbstract: This WIP paper will present our results to date in conducting a multimethod single casestudy, which is appropriate for deeply understanding multiple stakeholder perspectives within abounded environment, in our case, the Department of Mechanical Engineering at PennsylvaniaState University. The in-progress goal of our team in Mechanical Engineering at
men and women in engineering and other STEM fields,we are exploring the character of this difference using data from the Academic Pathways Study(APS), part of the NSF-funded Center for the Advancement of Engineering Education (CAEE).The APS is a multi-university, longitudinal study that focuses on students’ experiences as theymove into, through, and out of engineering education.15 Using a variety of methods, includingethnography, surveys, interviews, design tasks, and analyses of academic transcripts, APSresearchers have been systematically examining how engineering students navigate theireducation, and how engineering skills and identity develop during their undergraduate careers.In this paper, we take a mixed-methods approach to inquiry
Education Conference (FIE). 2016, (pp. 1-4). IEEE.[15] ] E. J. Abrica, T. B. Lane, S. Zobac, & E. Collins, Sense of belonging and community building within a STEM intervention program: A focus on Latino male undergraduates’ experiences, 2022. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 21(2), 228-242.[16] T. L. Tevis, & Z. Foste, From complacency to criticality: Envisioning antiracist leadership among white higher education administrators, Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, (2022), Advance online publication.[18] C. A. Young, B. Haffejee & D. L. Corsun, Developing cultural intelligence and empathy through diversified mentoring relationships. Journal of Management Education, (2018), 42(3), 319-346.[19] M. L. Boucher Jr, More
linguistic diversity of these facultymembers, we aim to enhance the academic community's capacity for innovation and globalengagement. This exploration is more than a mere examination of the challenges at hand; it is anacknowledgment and celebration of the rich, diverse contributions that international faculty maketo U.S. higher education. Through this comprehensive analysis, we seek to offer meaningfulinsights into professional development for international faculty, contributing to the evolution ofglobal engineering and humanitarian design in a world that is increasingly interconnected.3. Theoretical Framework a. Community Of Cultural Wealth Framework: We framed different cultural backgroundsfrom the asset-based perspective, not from the
target STEM transfer student retention. Despite repeated calls for the need to expand the STEM workforce, concerning indicatorsshow that STEM baccalaureate degree acquisition is not meeting workforce needs. For instance,although engineering jobs are estimated to grow 11% in the coming years, high-school studentinterest is stagnant [7] and about one-third of first-time freshmen engineering majors leave thefield [8]. Therefore, finding successful strategies to increase the number of STEM graduates iscritical. With 50% of graduates having attended a community college previously [9], communitycolleges play a large role in the educational experiences of many college graduates in scienceand engineering fields. Vertical transfer, defined as
and academic programs in Renewable Energy. Through an award from the National Science Foundation's, Partnership for Innovation Program, a grant was awarded to The University of Toledo on behalf of the University Clean Energy Alliance of Ohio to develop more certificates, courses and programs in renewable energy that are transferable across the state's educational institutions. In conjunction with the Ohio Board of Regents we are now in the process of determining those institutions that offer programs in the areas of wind, solar and nuclear technology. This project is a collaborative effort to determine how research centers, a supportive state government, industry, community colleges and adult career centers can cooperate to build a
Associate Director of Educational Innovation and Impact for UGA’s Engineering Education Trans- formations Institute (EETI). In addition to coordinating EETI’s faculty development programming, Dr. Morelock conducts research on institutional change via faculty development, with an emphasis on innova- tive ways to cultivate and evaluate supportive teaching and learning networks in engineering departments and colleges. He received his doctoral degree in Engineering Education at Virginia Tech, where he was a recipient of the NSF Graduate Research Fellowship. His dissertation studied the teaching practices of engineering instructors during game-based learning activities, and how these practices affected student motivation.Dr
interest and expertise include qualitative and mixed educational research methods, adult learning theory, student development, and women in education.Ken Yasuhara, University of Washington KEN YASUHARA is a graduate student in Computer Science and Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Washington. Ken is working on research projects within the Center for Engineering Learning and Teaching (CELT) and the Center for the Advancement of Engineering Education (CAEE).Cynthia Atman, University of Washington CYNTHIA J. ATMAN is the founding Director of the Center for Engineering Learning and Teaching (CELT) in the College of Engineering at the University of Washington and the Director
this multi-tiered mentoring community experience wouldaid in the development of the students’ STEM identity, evidenced by their feedback and decisionsto pursue additional research opportunities. Students who achieve four-year degrees in STEM are typically White cisgender men withconnections and resources that guide them through the process. Students outside of thisdemographic dealing with more complex circumstances tend to have more difficulty completingfour-year STEM degrees. This group of students is referred to as “disadvantaged”, and includesUnderrepresented Minority (URM) students, first-generation college students, and studentsreturning to school at an older age [1]. URM groups are defined by the NSF as “individuals ofraces or
Learning (PAL) programs and provides support to the General Engi- neering Learning Community. She is also co-developer of Entangled Learning, a model of rigorously- documented, self-directed learning in communities of practice. She has an M.A. in Music from The Pennsylvania State University and an M.L.S. from Indiana University. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2018 Supporting Student Learning Through Peer-Led Course Support InitiativesAbstractThis evidence-based practice paper outlines the three course support initiatives in place atClemson University to support student learning. In recognizing variation in student needs andlearning preferences, our
://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1133766[4] E. A. Cech, “Engineering’s Systemic Marginalization and Devaluation of Students andProfessionals With Disabilities”.[5] M. J. Erickson and K. H. Larwin, “The Potential Impact of Online/Distance Education forStudents with Disabilities in Higher Education,” vol. 5, no. 1.[6] P. Golding et al., “Building STEM Pathways for Students with Special Abilities,” in 2018ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings, Salt Lake City, Utah: ASEE Conferences,Jun. 2018, p. 30165. doi: 10.18260/1-2--30165.[7] C. Groen, L. McNair, M. Paretti, D. Simmons, and A. Shew, “Board 52: ExploringProfessional Identity Development in Undergraduate Civil Engineering Students WhoExperience Disabilities,” in 2018 ASEE Annual Conference &
to support student success inengineering. In border communities of the southwest, where rural communities blend acrossnational and state boundaries, student counternarratives of educational success involvecomplexity. In particular, engineering students’ descriptions of language, familial backgrounds,disciplinary knowledge, hidden curriculum of US post-secondary systems, and financial servicesbuilt for citizens OR international students indicate there is much to be learned about howinstitutions in border communities support or fail to support equitable access to engineeringpathways. In a larger study, transcript analysis of 40 interviews from undergraduates at a borderinstitution indicate scholars navigate familial and background difference
-efficacy beliefs and outcome expectations [1].The belonging component includes a set of activities to develop professional identity and senseof belonging. Activities such as establishing learning communities through project-orientedengineering teams, aim at developing freshmen and sophomores’ interactions with seniorstudents via capstone and design-oriented courses. These interactions are structured around twoone-credit courses, Introduction to Engineering (INGE-3001) and Introduction to LearningCommunities (INGE-3002).In the formative component, interventions in the form of talks and soft-skill workshops are aimedat training students using well-known high-impact educational practices [21]. Trainings basedon the Affinity Research Group (ARG) model
that enable them to work together [20]. By providing a groupenvironment, shared objective, and opportunity to work through unforeseen challenges,out-of-class activities offer conditions under which engineering students can develop as leaders.As an example, one recent study found design competition teams contributed to engineeringstudents leadership identity development through peer coaching, task management, anddecision-making [21]. Biomedical engineering students in a co-curricular design experience alsoreported the value of the out-of-class activities in providing exposure to leadership skills andpositions [22]. The present study contributes to the growing conversation around leadershipdevelopment in engineering education through student
and productive effects for engineering students. The dose model wedescribe in this paper has developed in light of certain very real challenges and needs. However,we also consider it worthwhile to confront the challenges involved in engaging engineeringstudents with ethical curricula. Drawing on and extending the medical metaphor here to considerside effects helps us outline critiques of the way engineering educators approach dosing studentswith ethics. Table 2: Advantages and Challenges Associated with Dosing Students with Ethics Dose Type Advantage in Engineering Ethics Challenges in Engineering Ethics Micro Integrate with other coursework; take up Requires modifying course planning; little
contexts. Examples offaculty experiments are supplied, as well as a program timeline and interview protocol.IntroductionAfter functioning heroically during the pandemic, the leaders at Michigan Engineering (theUniversity of Michigan College of Engineering) were exhausted and overwhelmed, like so manyuniversity faculty and staff around the nation who had contended with the challenges of a rapidtransition to online education, complex decisions around re-opening, student disengagement, andisolation. With concern for the leaders’ well-being and the flourishing of the college, the deanengaged the Director of Leadership Development in Michigan Engineering to bolsterorganizational health and effectiveness through an executive-level leadership
student learning and success, and the impact of a flexible classroom space on faculty teaching and student learning. She also led a project to develop a taxonomy for the field of engineering education research, and she was part of a team that studied ethical decision-making in engineering students.Trevion S. Henderson, University of Michigan Trevion Henderson is a doctoral student in the Center for Higher and Postsecondary Education (CSHPE) at the University of Michigan. He recently earned his master’s degree in Higher Education and Student Affairs at The Ohio State University while serving as a graduate research associate with the Center for Higher Education Enterprise. Trevion also hold’s a Bachelor’s degree in
the project, and concluded that it would be good to try in the long term. Hethanked Will for the idea, saying “good question.” Thus an undergraduate proposed a novel wayto address an engineering problem. He derived this suggestion from his broad education inengineering and his hobby of reading about innovative technologies. In Wylie’s observations,undergraduates tend to excel at this open-mindedness and ability to make novel connections. Inaddition, the PI took Will’s suggestion seriously because Will understood the lab’s specificproblem and matched his suggestion to it. Graduate students and PIs of course are also capableof open-minded, interdisciplinary thinking, but undergraduates’ current experience of wide-ranging coursework and their
-term study abroad programs. The results of and conclusions from the three studieswill be disseminated to the larger engineering education community through an innovative,online approach. Not only will we provide this information in actionable forms, but we will alsobe able to query responders about their own programs, and update the information in near realtime. Specifically, we will aggregate information as the various models for developing globalpreparedness are being employed, and will assess their effectiveness. Results from this initiativeoffer the engineering education community a set of impactful and flexible research-basedglobally focused engineering education pedagogical practices that correlate to learning, diversestudent populations
AC 2012-4696: MINORS AS A MEANS OF DEVELOPING TECHNOLOG-ICAL AND ENGINEERING LITERACY FOR NON-ENGINEERSDr. John Krupczak, Hope College John Krupczak is professor of engineering, Hope College, Holland, Mich.; CASEE Senior Fellow (2008- 2010); Past Chair, ASEE Technological Literacy Division, and Past Chair, ASEE Liberal Education Divi- sion.Dr. Mani Mina, Iowa State UniversityDr. Robert J. Gustafson, Ohio State University Robert J. Gustafson, P.E., Ph.D., is Honda Professor for engineering education and Director of the Engi- neering Education Innovation Center in the College of Engineering and a professor of food, agricultural, and biological engineering at the Ohio State University. He has previously served at Ohio