assesses Positive Urgency,Negative Urgency, (lack of) Premeditation, (lack of) Perseverance, and Sensation Seeking –factors which might impact a students’ likelihood to complete assignments.The statements were reviewed by the researchers and students were moved to different studygroups if necessary. For example, if a student assigned to the implementation intentions groupdid not follow instructions correctly and ended up writing a less specific goal, they were Page 26.200.4classified in group two for the analysis. Table 1 shows the resulting self-reporteddemographics for each of the three groups, and Table 2 shows the same information for
apriority in health care. Assuring this safety is a task that is more and more complicated andwhich entails potential risks with no one method being capable of guaranteeing a total absence oferrors. The Institute of Medicine estimates that “tens of thousands of deaths and injuries arecaused by medical mistakes every year [1]. The FDA estimates that number to be nearly 500,000[1]. Nowadays, one of the main worries in maintaining a high level of safety in health careenvironments is to closely follow the patient throughout their stay in a healthcare facility, i.e.,from their arrival until they are discharged, registering both waiting and care times in each of theareas subject to control. However, Mentioned patient waiting time is a detriment to the
) in order to be compared with GPAand persistence data to be collected each semester. Figure 1 shows the results for each question(with the positive coding). 1 GRIT Scale Item Average Response 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 Total average 0.3 Female average Male average 0.2 0.1 0
-STEM Majors while Closing Equity Gaps: Mentoring in a Multi-Disciplinary S-STEM ProgramAbstractThe S-STEM supported program ACCESS in STEM started at the University of Washington Tacoma as a Track 1 grant in 2018 andcontinued as a Track 2 grant in 2022. Since its inception, it has supported 124 students over 7 cohorts. Program scholars receive fullscholarships for their first two years, and partial scholarships for their third and fourth years. Students can participate in a summerbridge precalculus or research experience course, and project-based Introduction to Engineering or Introduction to Research coursesin their first year. Individual faculty mentoring, quarterly Success in STEM seminar courses, and an
Engineering from UT Austin (2021). Her research interests center around the experiences of marginalized students in U.S. higher education institutions. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2025 CAREER: Responsive Support Structures for Marginalized Students in Engineering - Insights from Year 5IntroductionUndergraduate engineering in the United States is characterized by many opportunities,demands, and obstacles within and beyond the classroom [1]. Opportunities refers to thingsstudents can access to improve their overall success in engineering, demands refers to typicalhardship expected of engineering (e.g., curricular difficulty, financial hardship, etc.), andobstacles refer to
their students. Thiscombination of roles is key in introductory engineering classes as it enables TFs to create a senseof belonging and build students' self-esteem. Peer mentors, like Teaching Fellows, have beenshown to positively impact and support incoming students by creating welcoming environmentsand tutoring students, aiding in the transition to college [1]-[5]. This WIP study will take a lookat the impact that Teaching Fellows have on cultivating belonging and self-esteem for first-yearengineering students.For the Fall 2024 semester, there were seven sections of EGR 1301 and NSE. Each pairedsection had its own Teaching Fellow. TF office hours were hosted every week, Monday throughThursday, from 5 pm to 9 pm, with each TF taking a 2-hour
disability status. However, a growing body of literature [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6],[7], [8] calls attention to departmental policies and practices that impact students’ sense ofbelonging and abilities to successfully navigate/complete CS majors.This work was motivated by two challenges with existing computing climate surveys. First,departments often develop/distribute organization-specific surveys [9], [10], [11]. These oftenhave no large-scale, cross-organization distribution, analysis, and comparison. Second, the most-used climate survey that provides cross-organization comparison, [the Data Buddies Survey,distributed by the Computing Research Association’s Center for Evaluating the ResearchPipeline (CERP) [1]] has a long completion time
the RCT, participants were asked to respond to two short open-endedscenarios, each depicting a commonly faced interpersonal communication scenario for womengraduate students. The first asked each participant to imagine that she had received criticalfeedback from her advisor, and the second asked the student to put herself in a situation in whichshe was confused by a comment made by her advisor about another student. These situationsdrew on the skills taught in two specific communication modules, namely, Receiving andResponding to Feedback and Active Listening for Question 1 and Question 2, respectively. TheAICS measured participant ability to illustrate how they would apply interpersonalcommunication skills in each scenario. Responses were
to traditional approaches can increasestudents’ conceptual knowledge and their ability to transfer acquired knowledge to newersituations [1-3]. Furthermore, exposure to real-world challenges, especially when presented in anactive and practical learning environment increases both student interest and pedagogicaleffectiveness. The National Academy of Engineering (NAE) in its report, “Educating theEngineer of 2020,” contends that solving the Grand Challenges will require more than justproviding students with technical training. It argues that an engineering education must producegraduates who combine technical excellence with a multitude of other skills includingcommunication, teaming, ethical reasoning, and contextual analysis. Students
c American Society for Engineering Education, 2015 Epistemological Foundations of Global Competencies: A New Theory to Advance Research on Global CompetenciesIntroductionAround the world, many influential stakeholders are concerned with increasing globalcompetitiveness of engineering graduates by increasing their global competency. Recent booksfrom the US, Australia, and Europe attest to growing interest in global engineering.1 In sum, Whether working on multi-national project teams, navigating geographically dispersed supply chains or engaging customers and clients abroad, engineering graduates encounter worlds of professional practice that are increasingly global in character. This new reality
(2004), Boston East Pipeline Network; and Alumni, Lead Boston 2004 (The National Conference for Community and Justice). She won the 2006 Northeastern University Aspiration Award, and was recognized at the 2003 Northeastern University Reception honoring Principal Investigators that obtained funding in excess of $1 million over a five-year period.Marina Bograd c American Society for Engineering Education, 2016TRANSFORM: TRANSFORMing liberal arts careers to meet demand for advanced manufacturing workforceAbstractIt is well recognized that a liberal arts degree (BA) equips graduates with many essential skillscited as critical for the current and future workforce. These include but are not
technique10 can often be successful, and can sometimes be implemented at thediscretion of educators, but is more often incorporated by curriculum or technology developersdirectly. In this work,we investigate the prevalence of avatars as potential role models through theexamination of 312 computing-infused Snap! programming activities created by secondaryteachers and high school interns for non-computer science K-12 classrooms.We seek to answer the following research questions: 1. How do computing-infused lessons created by teachers and high school interns differ in inclusion and usage of avatars? 2. How do creator and avatar demographics correlate?Related WorkAccording to Bandura’s theory of self-efficacy, similarities between a
Strategies Responses to ECE Exam Success and FailureIntroductionIn engineering as a profession and in engineering education, failure is commonplace[1]–attempteddesigns fail, experiments fail about 90% of the time, and students do not achieve the scores theydesire on homework, quizzes, and exams. Thus, the ability to navigate and respond to failure asan opportunity for growth and learning is a key component of the scientific enterprise. However,engineering education research is sparse on how students respond to failure.Research on response to failure has been extensive in workplace settings[2, 3], in which there is avery wide range of negative and positive responses to failure, including denial, anger, bargaining,depression
and showed a strong andsignificant correlation with closeness. Structural equation modeling shows that closeness is oneof four major predictors of grade performance, along with mechanics self-efficacy, personalqualities such as URM and First Generation College status and class size. Finally, empathy levelswere a meaningful predictor of closeness as had been expected. Implications are discussedincluding suggestions for ways to improve closeness within engineering classes and futureresearch opportunities.IntroductionThe instruction technique of large class (400 students +) lectures have been a part of universityeducation for at least the past 900 years 1. The impact of class size on learning has beenrigorously studied for the past 60 years and
hasspecific objectives that will support these goals. They are: (1) develop and maintain an effectiveliaison between BRCC and LSU; (2) utilize scholars to develop a peer ambassador/mentorprogram facilitating transfer success; (3) establish and conduct a pre-transfer academiccounseling program; (4) expand existing seminars to orient and integrate BRCC and othertransfer students into LSU and (5) invite BRCC math, science and engineering faculty toparticipate in ongoing Faculty Development.Activities of the program to date have included outreach, professional development, advising,and developing an overall assessment tool. All scholars participated in outreach activities thatconsisted of Peer-to-Peer talks at BRCC each semester and Shadow Days at LSU
, which requires a more flexible approach to allow students to better engage with thefield of engineering and to allow curricula to adapt to the ever-changing landscape ofengineering practice and technology. The significant curricular change involves taking thecurrent 6 credit hours of first year engineering courses and breaking them into a set of 1 credit(or less) modules from which students can select. This paper discusses in detail the first year ofthe project which has involved implementing changes to the current courses to prepare for thechange to the modular format along with getting buy-in from the administration and facultywithin the college. The paper also discusses outcomes from the changes implemented during thefirst year of the
Paper ID #49088Leveraging LLM Tutoring Systems for Non-Native English Speakers in IntroductoryCS CoursesIsmael Villegas Molina, University of California, San DiegoAudria Nikitza Montalvo, University of California, San DiegoBenjamin Ochoa, University of California, San DiegoProf. Paul Denny, University of AucklandLeonard Porter, University of California, San Diego ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2025 1 Leveraging LLM Tutoring Systems for Non-Native English Speakers in Introductory CS
can often hinge on extra-departmental fundingopportunities—institutional research centers and external grant competitions. As engineeringprograms seek to invest in the next generation of engineers, research administrators canoperationalize research effort data to identify (1) near-term undergraduate and graduate studentexperiential opportunities; (2) top-performing teacher-scholars poised to lead studentexperiences; (3) features of teacher-scholars that can be predictive of early-stage interventionsthat support their success as fundable grantees. Data visualizations in service to engineering andSTEM programs provide a high-context field of opportunity for administrators, faculty, andstudents, supporting the continued growth of the engineering
in an Undergraduate Transfer ProgramIntroduction The Student Pathways in Engineering and Computing for Transfers (SPECTRA) programis an NSF-STEM that supports high-achieving low-income students who intend to transfer froma technical college to Clemson University, a large R1 institution, and pursue engineering orcomputing degrees. The three goals of the program are as follows: (1) provide scholarshipopportunities to low-income students pursuing engineering or computing at Clemson, (2) buildcohorts of transfer students to support their transition into Clemson University, (3) assess itsprogress internally and externally to assist the transfer students and improve the program Having support at a community college, such as through a
successamong students: self-efficacy, sense of belonging, and identification with computing. Self-efficacy refersto beliefs about one’s ability to plan for and execute steps necessary for future success. 1 Research hasshown that self-efficacy promotes academic performance and motivation. 12 A sense of belonging isdefined as the subjective feeling of fitting in and being included as a valued and legitimate member of anacademic discipline, and is a known predictor of academic persistence and achievement. 9, 10, 35 Finally,domain identification refers to one’s self-definition, or the degree to which one feels that their academicpursuits are an important element of “who they are”. As a frame of reference, consider the differencebetween belonging and
identified as an essential component in the U.S. STEM Educationsystem with a total of 1,738 2-year institutions: 967 public, 100 non-profit and 671 private.1 In2012, there were over 20 million students enrolled in an academic institution across the UnitedStates with over 6 million being educated at a two-year public institution.2 These public two-year institutions also have a large population of underrepresented minorities with approximately34% of the total number of African Americans enrolled in an academic institution and 46% ofthe total number of Hispanics students enrolled in academic institutions.3 In addition toexpanding underrepresented minority participation through institutional partnerships with two-year public institutions, 33% of the
, signal integrity and THz sensors. He is a member of IEEE and ASEE. Page 26.1685.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2015 Using Systematic Literature Reviews to Enhance Student LearningI. Introduction and motivationLiterature review is a skill assumed to be in the arsenal of all graduate students pursuing thesisoptions at the MS or PhD level. There are many resources on writing literature reviews, fromcampus writing centers to books such as Machi and McEvoy.1 One would also assume that this isamong the very first tasks that research-oriented students would undertake. However, our
which is required of some of the 4+1 Programsavailable in engineering and computer science for students to be able to earn a Master’s Degreein one year after their Bachelor’s degree.Which parts of the Plan are the most important to the students, in general, was not known. In Fall2015, a survey on the components associated with the 4.0 Plan was given to a class of 62students with 59 students (95.2%) responding. The results of this survey are given and analyzed.These results give insight into how the 4.0 Plan is perceived by the students and can be used infuture instruction of the 4.0 Plan. The goal of all this is to help the ENGR student understand thatthere are things to learn about learning and methods that can be used to enhance learning.For
comparisonacross multiple years. These visualizations include tracking of student performance on a range ofstandardized assessments including the Force Concept Inventory (FCI).1 the Force and MotionConceptual Evaluation (FMCE) of Thornton and Sokoloff (1998)2, and the Brief Electricity andMagnetism Assessment (BEMA).3 Assessments can be viewed as pre- and post-tests withcomparative statistics (e.g., normalized gain), decomposed by answer in the case of multiple-choice questions, and manipulated using prespecified data transformations such as aggregationand refinement (drill down and roll up). The system is designed to support inclusion of a rangeof supervised inductive learning methods for schema inference, unsupervised learning algorithmsfor similarity
experiences in engineering, aspira-tions to pursue postgraduate engineering degrees, and emotional well-being [1]. It has also beenshown that female mentors are more likely than male mentors to positively influence mentees’ sci-ence careers and that mentees with female mentors are more likely to view their mentors as goodrole models [2]. The National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine released a reportin 2019 describing the science behind mentoring programs. Among their results, they found thatstudents with a mentor are more likely to succeed in their major [3]. Similarly, studies indicatedthat 100% of women in engineering who had women mentors continued in engineering, which is14% higher than those without mentors and 18% higher than
for students, many universities areturning to social media to outreach to potential students. Social media has been found to performan essential role in shifting sentiments, moods and overall image a university portrays [1]. Thisstudy examines the forward-facing presence of university engineering programs at two publicuniversities. This study uses content and textual analysis and the lenses of occupationaldemography and feminist post-structuralism to make sense of the messages the programs areportraying to potential students and other stakeholders about the student experience and learningoutcomes valued by the university. The study examines social media posts on Instagram,LinkedIn, and Facebook, as well as the university website and publicly
their STEM outreach. Although the event waslabeled as being national, the vast majority of teams were located near the company’sheadquarters. The recruitment begins in October and the final contest is in mid-February. Thereare several checkpoints along the way which determine whether a team has accomplishedenough to stay in the contest. This paper describes one high school competition that began as a“national competition” at a single location in 2009 and has evolved over the past three years to acompetition that now includes three regional contests where national qualifiers are selected tocompete nationally.IntroductionIn 2010 the authors approached Phoenix Contact 1, an international controls company, to becomea technology supplier for a grant
and transgender (LGBT) individuals in U.S.workplaces often face disadvantages in pay, promotion, and workplace experiences.1-7 It is stilllegal in many states to fire LGBT persons due to sexual identity or gender expression.8 Recentscholarship on the experiences of LGBT students and professionals suggests that thesedisadvantages may be particularly pernicious within science and engineering-related fields, giventhe patterns of heteronormativity and heterosexism documented therein.9-12 LGBT faculty inscience, technology, engineering and math (STEM)-related departments face harassment anddiscrimination, marginalization, and chilly departmental and classroom climates.10 In a study oftwo NASA centers, furthermore, LGBT professionals encountered
Environmental Engineering from the University of Notre Dame. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2025Transitioning from a Project-Based Learning to a Work-Integrated Learning Program: Insights from Year 2Introduction “If we teach today's students as we taught yesterday's, we rob them of tomorrow” [1].The quote by John Dewey describes the crossroads the project team was at in the transition Year1 to Year 2 of the National Science Foundation (NSF) grant “Greenway Institute ofElizabethtown College Center for Sustainability and Equity in Engineering” (Grant No.2219807). The project was funded by the NSF Division of Engineering Education and Centers(EEC) and Directorate for Engineering
performance, motivation, andpersistence in engineering programs [1]. Understanding these perceptions can help educatorsdesign more effective curricula that leverage LLM to enhance learning outcomes. Additionally,the utility value of LLM, which refers to the perceived usefulness and practical benefits of thesetools, plays a significant role in students' engagement and academic success [2]. By examiningthese factors, we aim to provide insights into how LLM can be integrated into engineeringeducation to support students' academic and professional development.Utility value, defined as the perceived usefulness and practical benefits of a tool or task, is acritical factor in students' engagement and motivation in academic settings. Venugopal et