active learning and peer-to-peerinteraction in the online environment. Expert talks feature faculty members from variousinstitutions and industry professionals discussing their research and industry related-work aroundspecific challenges within each theme and promote deeper understanding of the issues.Throughout the course, students also work on a project involving entrepreneurially-mindedlearning (EML). They identify an opportunity to create value related to one or more of the fourthemes; perform customer discovery and needs analysis; imagine and develop a futuristicsolution to address the needs; identify and research current technologies, which, when furtherdeveloped, could enable the development and implementation of their futuristic solution
andlabs were matched to align and maximize interests. Students also received formal collegeguidance and training in public speaking during the summer. The program ended with acolloquium, open to the university community and family members of students, whereparticipants gave short talks to present their work.The program includes two courses: Dimensions of Scientific Inquiry (DSI) and Basic Robotics toInspire Scientific Knowledge (BRISK). DSI, taught by a member of the NYU faculty, is adiscussion-based course that covers scientific methods and practice, including their social,cultural, political, and economic contexts; ethical questions surrounding science and technology;and writing, especially as it relates to college application materials and a
project, we examined the impact of micro-interventions aimedsolely at increasing the students’ sense of community in the early career course. These included,for example, a focus on classroom norms, strategies to increase peer-to-peer interactions, andpeer testimonials to enable discussions of the challenges faced by first-year engineering students,among others. For the third and final iteration of the project, we examined the impact ofinterventions aimed at both classroom community and relevancy.Based on the findings of this study and considering the context of the research plan, we have thefollowing concluding observations. There were important instructional differences seen betweenthe two courses as shown by the COPUS observational data
currently working on writing a book chapter for Algebraic and Combinatorial Computational Biology, an Elseiver publication. Additionally, Prof. Ghosh-Dastidar has extensive experience mentoring more than thirty students through different programs such as the NYC-AMP program, City Tech’s Emerging Scholar Program, and MAA NREUP grants.Dr. Diana Samaroo, NYC College of Technology and the Graduate Center of the City University of New York Diana Samaroo is an Associate Professor and Chair of Chemistry Department at NYC College of Technol- ogy, CUNY. Her pedagogical research is the area of peer led team learning in Chemistry and integrating STEM into curricula. With a background in biochemistry, her research interests are in the
mentioned during the interviews, “...they [thestudents] are going to be the messengers that carry the message of AMR forward to their peers,into their homes, to their parents.” The curriculum incorporated storytelling elements in the formof narrative-based educational videos, retellings of student experiences, and humanizingpathogens in story building (Figure 5).Figure 4. Examples of the curriculum's utilization of storytelling elements. (Left) Discussionslides use human-scaling for pathogens to create context, (Right) narrative-based storytelling instudent activities.Preparing the students to become the “messengers” to their communities required the ability toarticulate the concept of AMR orally. With the goal of fostering communication skills
involvesconfidence in taking on research challenges, learning new skills, and contributing to the project team.Finally, recognition by others plays a pivotal role in solidifying an engineering identity. It can be definedas “recognition (i.e., beliefs that they are seen as a good student in the subject by peers, parents, andteachers) as being the type of person that can do a particular subject” [17, p. 2]. In the context of thisstudy, recognition reflects both interpersonal validation from engineering peers and mentors as well aspersonal internalization of external recognition. Through others identifying their engineering talent andtechnical contributions, students begin to think of themselves as good engineers worthy of that field. Withengineering interest
technical writing skills, which are often not demonstrated in traditional exams. We emphasized developing connections that can facilitate belonging. We focused on buildingconnections between students and four other factors: the professor, the course content, the peers,and the ChemBE major. Connection between students and the professor can be fostered throughthe professor’s display of care and support [17]. Understanding the relevance of the courseworkthrough real-world applications can promote connections with the course content and the major.Participating in cooperative learning can provide opportunities to interact with peers and facilitatepeer connections.Supportive Classroom in Cell Biology for Engineers During the course introduction, the
grades over the course of the semester?Final grades for the course were determined through two individual assignments (20% of thefinal grade), and five team assignments (40% of the final grade), where every team memberreceives the same grade. The remaining 40% consisted of a combination of individual- and team-based grades: reflective journal, peer evaluation, mentor evaluation, and engineering graphics.Because assignments in engineering graphics contribute 20% to the final grade, and were gradedon a pass/fail basis, we compared student performance both with and without the graphics Page 26.1740.2grades.On an overall basis, we have not found a
purposefully avoidstreating minority gender identities as an afterthought13,25. The ability to select as many labels asappropriate prevents situations in which a respondent might have to choose between “Male” and“Transgender Male,” a situation that can be alienating. Our approach also balances length withinclusion13. In this configuration, a woman who identifies with her biological sex would be ableto select both “female” and “cisgender” to describe herself. If an individual’s gender identity didnot fall into the categories listed in the survey, they were prompted to write in their specificidentity next to “a gender not listed.” The phrasing of this item was crafted to treat write-inresponse as equally valid as the other options provided13.We defined
narratives.Author 1 invited Authors 3 and 4 to take part in the data collection process based on their sharedinterests. We then began writing individually. To write individually, we engaged in a “datageneration exercise” [12], which includes chronologically listing major events or experiences,the circumstances of these events as well as stating why these events are important. In terms ofcollaboration style, we adopted Partial concurrent collaboration, where researchers contribute todifferent stages in the process but do not fully engage from the beginning to the end.The concurrent model allowed us to write individually based on the overarching prompt and thenshare stories with the team. Sharing the stories with the group helped us add probing questions
engineering students who have made it beyond traditional exit points inengineering, and into upper division courses. This understanding will be developed throughaddressing the following research questions (RQ):RQ 1) What experiences, affective domain traits, and social capital resources explainengineering students’ development of engineering role identity and feelings of belongingness?RQ 2) In what ways are these experiences unique for first generation engineering students whencompared to continuing generation peers?This increased understanding will be further utilized by the research team in subsequentqualitative phases of the research project by exploring grounds for causation and thedevelopmental role of any significant factors play in development
the 2019 RAMP program, and how wepropose to continue this iterative process in the 2020 RAMP program. As we write this, RAMPin 2020 is expected to be fully online, a virtual program, as we shelter from the Covid-19 virus.Finally, we suggest why the PAR approach may be especially helpful for creating moresupportive and beneficial environments for women in engineering majors.In Section 2.0 RAMP student recruitment and demographics are discussed. The design andimplantation of PAR focus groups and online survey methods are presented in Section 3.0.Section 4.0 shows the results of data analysis and Section 5.0 summarizes the contributions andoutlines future work.2.0 RAMP Student Recruitment and DemographicsThe RAMP program is advertised to all
likely are you to consider participating in research activities if you are given the chance? (1-5 slider scale) 9. I can conduct scholarly research on a topic. (1-5 slider scale) 10.I can explain research findings in my own words. (1-5 slider scale) 11.I can cite references appropriately in my research. (1-5 slider scale) 12.I work well in project teams. 13.I am comfortable taking feedback on my work from my peers. (1-5 slider scale) 14.I am confident that I can name three campus resources that are available for me (1-5 slider scale) 15.I know what it means to be interdisciplinary. (1-5 slider scale)Survey Block 2: Writing Assignment 16.Rate the impact that you believe your course writing assignments will have
and the Commonwealth supports key initiatives in diversity, equity, and inclusion atall levels. [12]In contrast, there is low participation of women and low representation of URM in STEM and ahigh number of women in poverty in the region. Common STEM barriers include a lack ofmentors and role models; lack of awareness and understanding of STEM opportunities; and lackof academic preparation for STEM degree programs. Societal and cultural biases favor somecareers (nursing and teaching, for example) over others (e.g., engineering and science) forwomen, meaning fewer women pursue certain STEM fields. Those who do sometimes lackfamily and peer support.OriginsPVWIS was founded on the idea of access. The range of access for women in STEM isdependent
had complementary components that involved: (1) matching participants with facultyand other undergraduates (peer-mentoring) or graduate student researchers under the supervisionof the faculty for direct hands-on training in relevant computational and experimental researchmethods, (2) participation in research-oriented field trips (e.g., various labs on campus, Ad AstraRocket Co., near the Johnson Space Center of the National Aeronautics and SpaceAdministration [NASA], etc.) (3) participation in professional-development seminars (GREpreparation, technical writing), and (4) presenting formal research papers at professionalconferences and submitting to refereed journals.The REU programs coordinated with the college’s own summer program and the
Technology (CWIT) at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County. She is currently on sabbatical leave as a Visiting Professor in the College of Computing and Information Sciences at Northeastern University. She received a Ph.D in Computer Science from the University of North Car- olina, Chapel Hill and an AB in Computer Science from Harvard University. She established an interna- tionally recognized visualization research program supported by over $9,000,000 in external funding as PI or CoPI, including the NSF CAREER award. Dr. Rheingans has over eighty peer-reviewed publications, including the NIH/NSF Visualization Research Challenges report, published in 2006 by IEEE. Dr. Rhein- gans co-chaired the papers program for
]. Research shows that student interest in STEM field decreases as their grade levelsincrease [2]. It is expected that in the next five years, there will be a shortage of talented andskilled employees in STEM fields [1], [2].Among the reasons that U.S. students lack interest in STEM fields is their perception that formalK-12 STEM education is not directly relevant to their daily life experiences [3], [4]. Themathematical and scientific content presented in formal settings does not appear to be directlyuseful in their day-to-day experiences and their interactions with others in their community.Content knowledge is often presented in a way that seems compartmentalized and impractical [3]– [7]. Especially in their social interactions with peers, family
and analyzed at the time of this writing. By comparison, peers in theCollege of Engineering had first and second year retention rates of 50% and 38%, respectively, onaverage. Peers in other FIGs performed comparably to the FORCES cohorts. Overall, students inlearning communities were retained at higher rates than those who were not in learningcommunities. We note, however, that the results varied for each separate cohort, as did the levelof significance of the results. The FORCES retention rate was never significantly different fromthe other engineering FIG students. 70 61 59
facilitation of activities (before and while visiting K-12 students), writing skills used when preparing an outreach activity proposal (to includespecific instructions on how to adapt it to fit the needs of the community partners) and withwritten reflections of the experiences from the visits to the K-12 classrooms. The schedule of thecourse included four to six visits to the K-12 selected schools to nurture the development of atrusting learning environment. The EGR 299 S course was also a creative way to engage andimprove retention of CPP engineering students.E-Girl eventIn 2013, when funding was obtained to develop the “Hispanics in Engineering” program, the E-Girl event was created by two CPP female engineering students (Hadasa Reyes, a
students, who entered the Tickle College of Engineering as freshmen.A program which spans a five-year process--two years at the community college, a summerbridge program, and three years at University of Tennessee--is proposed. Activities includefaculty exchange between institutions, student skills seminars, sustained mentoring, intra-cohortpeer learning, and inter-cohort peer-teaching. The individual elements of the program as well asthe synergistic integration of elements have been chosen to balance two influences: (1) aprogram designed with theoretical influence from Tinto’s Theory of Voluntary StudentDeparture, and (2) a practical acknowledgment of demonstrated success at the University ofTennessee. This paper will provide a summary of the
Awards. Increase financial support for low-income students with academicability/talent or potential for engineering degree programs by offering an average of 24scholarships per year over a 6-year period to at least 36 unique students. Attention will be givento recruiting students from backgrounds that are underrepresented in engineering at theUniversity.II. Multi-Layered Mentoring. Support student’s academic success, matriculation, sense ofbelonging, persistence, and career aspirations with faculty mentors, peer mentors and industrymentors; coordinate with academic advising.III. Social and Academic Support. Foster cohort formation through collaborative design teamprojects for introductory engineering design courses, regular S-STEM activities
account for ….. I would rather spend an hour of my time working with the student to get back on track than an hour of my time just writing emails telling explaining why they have zero and all their assignments.Joey’s ability to balance clear expectations with flexibility in the classroom shows how hispersonal PCK is shaping his teaching approach. Additionally, his interaction with students, suchas spending time working with them individually, suggests that he is adapting his teachingpractices to the needs of their classroom context. So, these first-year instructors' personal PCKand the classroom context in which they teach are both important factors that can influence theirpedagogical practices. Effective teaching requires a balance
the statics book, as well as writing content that could not be found in othersources, such as the reaction forces. She wrote a few examples for the book, but most of the workwas editorial by organizing the content into chapters. When she was first asked to help compileand write this OER book, she was extremely excited. Once she began working on it, she began tofeel overwhelmed and found it quite daunting at the beginning. Although aspects of thedevelopment of the OER took numerous hours and became monotonous, she thoroughly enjoyedwriting her own sections and examples. The process was more time consuming than she expected,but once she finished compiling and writing all the chapters, she had a great sense of pride andaccomplishment.Overall
solving the open-endedproblem wrote: “After some guess and check with various resistors that I failed to write down, Ifound that the best combination, or a possible combination was to use the 40 ohm resistor and the70 ohm resistor in parallel” (emphasis added). Additionally, strategies such as use of a textbookor peers for help would not be discerned through study of student written work. Even ifprofessors do not have access to software that allows recording and annotating of students’ work,or do not have the time themselves to review audio data, the think-aloud process itself could helpstudents develop metacognitive and problem solving strategies that will improve their taskperformance27. The results from this research suggest recommending
realm of artificial intelligence(AI) research. By focusing on the development and implementation of real-time computer visionon energy-efficient Cortex-M microprocessors, we offer a practical and educational avenue forstudents to delve into the burgeoning field of AI. Through a combination of theoreticalunderstanding and practical application, students are empowered to explore AI concepts, gainproficiency in low-power computing, and contribute to real-world AI projects. Furthermore, theproject offered student interns a valuable opportunity to refine their research capabilities,particularly in the realms of scientific writing and presentation, while simultaneously boostingtheir self-assurance and enthusiasm for pursuing STEM careers in the field
collaboration and communitybuilding around an issue among researchers who are also participants [13]. As Ellis, Adams, andBochner [14] describe, community autoethnography enables researchers to study “the personalexperience of researchers-in-collaboration to illustrate how a community manifests particularsocial/cultural issues” (p. 279). In our case, the issues that emerged in our writings anddiscussions centered on the challenges of the gender gap, underrepresented minority status,international identities, and first generation students.The data was generative, embracing the researcher's subjectivity in the spirit of autoethnography.The data emerged from the dynamic communication as we discussed the class readings, relatedentries in our journals, and
ideation was twofold: deter procrastination and encouragecomfort in writing and drawing in front of each other. These methods also encouraged mini-critiques as a way of further exploring each other’s ideas.The first was a simple brainstorm of potential areas of problem solving for their centraldesign question. Each team sat around a table covered on one large sheet of newsprint paper.The students were given 10 minutes to write out key words and thoughts. After 10 minutes,they moved clockwise to review, critique, and expand on the ideas written by their teammate. The process was repeated until all original thoughts had been thoroughly expandedupon. These was presented to the students as the catalyst for designing their solutions.Before they could
covered in FYS 101-eng, these topics directly related toteaching the three major process points of SRL (forethought, performance, and self-reflection). The primary mode of instruction for FYS 101-eng was active learning. Most classmeetings started with a short lecture introduction by the instructor (5-10 minutes) and the rest ofthe class meeting was spent in small group discussions where students would answer discussionquestions and report themes of discussion back to the larger group. At the end of each classsession, several reflection questions were assigned based on the topic of the day and studentswere required to write a one page reflection on how they could apply the day’s topic personally.These reflections were collected and graded
” programs and “first yearseminars”, international first year experience conferences (see, for example, the EuropeanFirst Year Experience 2015, www.uib.no/en/efye_2015), centers such as the NationalResource Center for First Year Experience and Students in Transition (www.sc.edu/fye), andan international journal on the first year experience (https://fyhejournal.com/index ). In SouthAfrica about a third of students drop out or fail their first year of university study4 .Some of the things first year students typically struggle with are: choosing a career direction,managing their time, mastering academic skills such as effective study methods and academicreading and writing, assessing their own understanding of their work, coping with the fastpace and
knowledgestudents have assimilated through various courses in their major for professional success. ProjBLpedagogy has been adopted and implemented in ME425. This engaged pedagogy aims to helpstudents enhance their cognitive, non-cognitive and critical thinking skills through engineeringdesign tasks.CMG250 has been identified as one of the most critical courses in the Construction Managementmajor. ProjBL has been adopted and implemented for CMG250 course. In this course anindependent project is assigned to each student to calculate the estimation of a building project.The students work on the project with their peers with necessary guidance from the instructor.The project aims to improve students’ study habits, and enhance their abilities for