: Effects calculation and risk analysis” published by CRC Press) and more than 20 papers in international peer-reviewed journals.Ms. Raelene Dufresne, Texas A&M University - Qatar Ms. Dufresne is an educator with 20 years experience in both secondary and tertiary educational insti- tutions in North America and abroad, teaching students from all over the world. A proponent of using technology in the classroom, she currently flips her classes using videos and interactive learning activities to improve student understanding, as well as to level the playing field for her freshmen mathematics- for-engineers classes at an overseas branch campus of Texas A&M University. Notably, her secondary students at the American
and research aresupported by award funding from various organizations. They often are directed to womenwithout considering WOC's unique challenges. For example, ADVANCE is a fund that invests infaculty success by exploring and establishing institution-based support programs and strategiesto enhance the climate and institutional context encountered by faculty women in engineering[10]. These initiatives may warrant a different structure at different institutions, such as minority-serving institutions (MSIs), in keeping with institutional missions and demographics. Specific toMSI, Allen et al. [11] proffered that institutional transformation must assist women faculty inSTEM by providing support to develop writing and research skills, networking
populations a moving target. In this paper,we examine some enormously complex aspects of equity and inclusion work that can often beperceived as simplicities, particularly among our collective scholarship and practicecommunities. Those with normative and privileged identities may in fact not see or understandthe range of experiences inside these hidden and transitioning identity categories and thecomplex challenges associated with investigating, intervening in, and embracing thesecommunities. There are yet more complexities under that surface. When writing about marginalizedstudent “populations” we tend to see them through a lens that others them as research subjects,and in turn, often fail to recognize the researcher and practitioner (i.e
in Engineering Education (FREE, formerly RIFE, group), whose diverse projects and group members are described at feministengineering.org. She received a CAREER award in 2010 and a PECASE award in 2012 for her project researching the stories of undergraduate engineering women and men of color and white women. She received ASEE-ERM’s best paper award for her CAREER research, and the Denice Denton Emerging Leader award from the Anita Borg Institute, both in 2013. She helped found, fund, and grow the PEER Collaborative, a peer mentoring group of early career and re- cently tenured faculty and research staff primarily evaluated based on their engineering education research productivity. She can be contacted by email at
were loaded into Dedoose qualitative software; we applied open coding,selective coding, and theoretical coding [20], [21] to analyze the data. Throughout this process,memo-writing was used to identify emergent themes and explicate findings [22], [23]. Thecoding scheme includes the following parent codes: unified voice, group agency, organizational 3character, emotional investment, interpersonal rapport, and role of the RED consortium. For thepurpose of this paper, we focus primarily on unified voice and group agency, taking intoconsideration where and when codes within these two categories intersect with codes within theother categories as well as
thinking to structure theirengagement with ideas and knowledge.4,7,8 The intent is to engage learners’ imaginations in theirpursuit of understanding and thus engender the kind of caring about learning necessary fordeveloping deep understanding. In the IE approach, instruction is designed to support adevelopmental sequence of five different stages of understanding that enable learners to makesense of the world in different ways. Learners progress to new stages by mastering the cognitivetools associated with each stage of understanding. (Cognitive tools are mental devices developedby our ancestors to help make sense of the world and to operate more effectively in it.)The most important cognitive tool is narrative. Egan writes, “Narrative
collaborative notes [44], [46] Throughout the finalstages of analysis, the team reviewed collective comments to categorize codes and consideroverarching themes [44], [46]. These themes resulted in the findings described below.Triangulation and rigor were ensured through the use of varied data sources that capturedwritten, spoken, and performed moments in the process of professional development through thetwo courses [44]. Rigor was further established through prolonged engagement with theparticipants which allowed for continuous conversations, member checking, and peer debriefingalong the process of analysis and writing [45]. This participatory research approach amplified theparticipating teachers’ voices and created the space for an iterative process
compared to that of the topic-quiz reflection. These results might beexplained by the fact that students were requested to write a 1-page reflection for both the topicquiz and DYOP. It is reasonable that for some levels to increase, others must decrease. Sinceproblems designed by students on the DYOP were of similar complexity as those they completedon quizzes, a decrease in percent coverage at the Understand and Apply levels indicates lessemphasis placed on engagement at these levels during reflection rather than less engagement atthem. Indeed, it would be difficult for students to engage at the Analyze level without first havingengaged fully in the Understand and Apply levels. The decrease in N/A (-20.6%), however, can beattributed to a decrease
TechnologyStudies (STS). Throughout the fall 2019 semester, I began to question the ways in which I hadbeen recruited and channeled, as a woman with an interest in science and math, into studyingengineering. Upon taking an introductory STS course, I was introduced to reflecting criticallyabout engineering as a field of study. This led me to enroll in a graduate seminar, EngineeringStudies, which provided me with a much deeper introduction to STS-inflected studies ofengineering, including engineering education. During this time, my professor, along with apostdoctoral fellow, were co-PIs for a study of student experiences in engineering education andhad already convened a group of undergraduate students who were in the process of interviewingtheir peers
student engagement and academic success measures (such as retention) hasbeen well-established in the literature (e.g.,[3]), the program was designed to create a smalllearning community experience for students who would be less likely to demonstrate highengagement with the university, the curriculum, their instructors, and their peers. There are manyreasons why low-income students might show low-engagement levels. One reason is that aschool and/or family obligation requires them to work a significant number of hours each week.It is difficult to attend football games or join a sorority when you are working 20-40 hours aweek off-campus. Engagement is a luxury that many low-income students simply cannot afford.The Endeavour Program was designed to
programs remain extremely low. The emphasis on conventionalpedagogical methods in engineering programs, coupled with a deficit-based approach that isfocused on the remediation of weaknesses, does little to foster the unique strengths ofneurodivergent students. In addition to the obstacles posed by traditional education system, thestigma related to a disability label leads many neurodivergent college students to neither discusstheir diagnosis with peers and professors nor obtain academic accommodations that may helpthem to persist in a challenging learning environment.To address these challenges and realize the potential contributions of neurodivergent individualsto engineering fields, a research project funded by the Engineering Education and
commented that it might be useful to find ways thatassessments could be built into the courses such that they do not conflict with the final projects.Despite the difficulties the staff members believed that quantitative tools could be useful andcomplement qualitative assessments. They stated that sometimes it is difficult for youth toexpress themselves through online writing. Additionally, some youth are not as expressiveduring public events such as the showcase. While anecdotal information from the youth parentsand peers showed positive outcomes, capturing these using structured, detailed methods wouldbe useful. Thus, the staff expressed that with better assessment tools and procedures, surveys orquestionnaires could still be useful in this
contribute to students’ stress andanxiety, and have been shown to impact achievement and retention. This study uses ethnographicmethods to investigate how expectations are socially constructed in engineering programs andhow students’ come to internalize these expectations. Data was collected in ten focus groupswith a total of 38 participants at two universities with different institutional characteristics. Thequalitative analysis drew on constant comparative methods and proceeded from topic coding ofsources of expectations to interpretive coding of mechanisms in which students internalizedexperiences. More specifically, sources of expectations were identified as academics, superiors,peers, extra-curricular, and from outside the major. The rich
capacity to contribute to global sustainabilityissues like climate change. These experiences equip them well for the professional phase of theircareers, allowing them to collaborate effectively in an increasingly interconnected world.The integration of international virtual exchange (IVE) programs in engineering education hasgained significant attention in recent years. As part of this trend, the assessment of studentoutcomes through IVE has become a crucial area of research and evaluation. Recent studies,such as one conducted by East Carolina University, have demonstrated the potential of IVE toenhance student learning and academic performance [21]. The definition of IVE as “technology-mediated international experiences that are peer-driven
initiative and translate her passion for STEM into opportunities that will attract, inspire and retain more girls in STEM to make it the new norm. She has also architected SFAz’s enhanced Community College STEM Pathways Guide that has received the national STEMx seal of approval for STEM tools. She integrated the STEM Pathways Guide with the KickStarter processes for improving competitive proposal writing of Community College Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSIs) and is currently a co-PI on the HSI ATE Resource Hub. Throughout her career, Ms. Pickering has written robotics software, diagnostic expert systems for space station, manufacturing equipment models, and architected complex IT systems for global collaboration
Flexibility IP SCAFFOLDING Zone of Learner Assistance Learner Assistance Towards Independence OF Proximal Instructor Active Learning Peer Learning PLP Project or Exam INSTRUCTION Development Weeks 1-4 Weeks 1-4 Week 5 Student: Faculty ASSESSMENT OF • Non-technical core competency • Formative & summative feedback on model PERFORMANCE AND • Improved understanding of • Feedback on student interactions
of S&E bachelor’s degrees were awarded to women in 2018—women’srepresentation varies greatly by field and women are still underrepresented in S&E occupations”[1]. While representation of some student populations has seen an increase in the past decades(e.g., Latinx/Hispanic students have seen an increase in share of Science and EngineeringBachelor’s degrees awarded from 8% in 2008 to 12% in 2018 [1]), others have been stagnatingor declining (e.g., Black and African American students changing from 4.7% to 4.3% from 2008to 2018 [1]).Underrepresentation affects students’ ways of experiencing engineering education and practiceand creates unique sets of challenges compared to their majority-representing peers. Experiencessuch as “cold
studentcohort model (for each incoming group of students) and also providing supports to buildcommunity across cohorts as well as including students’ families in their college experiences,our program aimed to increase student satisfaction and academic success. We recruited twocohorts of nine incoming students each across two years, 2019 and 2020; 69% of participantswere from underrepresented racial or minority groups and 33% were women. Each participantwas awarded an annual scholarship and given co-curricular support including peer and facultymentoring, a dedicated cohort space for studying and gathering, monthly co-curricular activities,enhanced tutoring, and summer bridge and orientation programs. Students’ families were alsoincluded in the
compassionand empathy with respect to education (numbers identified in Table 2). A Web of Science search[48] found that the term empathy (or empathetic) was a much more common idea in highereducation and engineering than compassion, which in turn was much more common thankindness. Papers that resulted from the search on kindness and education were generally relatedto PK12 or medical settings (nursing and medical school). The pre-college papers tended tofocus on teaching kids and students to be kind in their behavior toward peers and more broadly.This had a focus on fostering kindness in pupils among an array of prosocial behaviors,sometimes included with social-emotional education. The medical school settings tended tofocus on teaching future
2010 Annual Conf. and Expo., Louisville, KY, USA. [Online]. Available: https://peer.asee.org/advance-peer-mentoring-summits-for-underrepresented-minority-wo men-engineering-faculty. [Accessed: 07-Mar-2021].[2] “National Institute for Faculty Equity.” Serc.carleton.edu. . [Online]. Available,: https://serc.carleton.edu/facultyequity/index.html. [Accessed: 07-Mar-2021].[3] “2019 Symposium.” Arlnetwork.org. [Online]. Available: https://arlnetwork.org/symposium/2019/. [Accessed: 07-Mar-2021].[4] D. Bell, “Who’s afraid of critical race theory?,” Univ. of Illinois Law Review, pp. 893–910, 1995.[5] K., Crenshaw, N. Gotanda, G. Peller, and K. Thomas, Ed., Critical Race Theory: The Key Writings
HyperactivityDisorder (ADHD) possess significant creative and risk-taking potential, they have remainedhighly underrepresented in engineering programs. Past studies have indicated that students withADHD have an extremely high risk of academic failure and dropout, and are more than twice aslikely than their peers without ADHD to leave university. Traditional engineering programs arefailing to attract and retain neurodiverse learners, and thus do not benefit from these students’high potential for creative thinking. The disconnect between the traditional educationenvironment and the abilities of students with ADHD is not unique to higher education. In fact,high school students with ADHD have significantly lower GPAs and are over eight times morelikely to drop out
mentoring.Dr. Ronald Hughes, California State University, Bakersfield ACADEMIC RESPONSIBILITIES: (2017-Present) Associate Professor for the STEM Affinity Group, School of Natural Sciences and Mathematics, California State University, Bakersfield. Duties included teaching responsibilities in Undergraduate Biology. Additional duties included grant writing, manage- ment, and evaluation. RESEARCH INTERESTS: Include teaching and learning cognition skills, informal learning environ- ments and strategies, and science/technology curriculum design/implementation/evaluation.Mrs. Stephanie Salomon, California State University, Bakersfield c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019 Enhancing
at whichthey are opting out of academic math and science classes and , often unknowingly, closing theiroptions for engineering in post-secondary education. As such, the primary target group identified Page 26.772.6became girls who had the aptitude for STEM subjects but who were not choosing STEM coursesin grade 10. The secondary target was the girls’ key influencers: parents, teachers, guidancecounselors, and peers. The overall program was later named WEMADEIT.Members of the partnership took on projects that played to their institutional strengths in fieldsoutside of engineering. For example, Western University led the development of teacher
11 55 Page 26.816.10 Table 5. Attributes of Value for the GE+ Community Top 6 Attributes Valuable for Highly Valuable GE+ Community n % Faculty Accessibility 15 75 Career Counseling 15 75 Upperclass Student Mentoring 14 70 Common Classes 11 55 Peer Tutoring 10
methods for involving students in curriculum development and teaching through Peer Designed Instruction.Dr. Alexandra Coso Strong, Florida International University As an assistant professor of engineering education at Florida International University, Dr. Alexandra Coso Strong works and teaches at the intersection of engineering education, faculty development, and complex systems design. Alexandra completed her doctorate in aerospace engineering at Georgia Tech in spring, 2014. Prior to attending Georgia Tech, Alexandra received a bachelor’s degree in aerospace engineering from MIT (2007) and a master’s degree in systems engineering from the University of Virginia (2010). Alexandra comes to FIU after completing a
-in Help Tutoring and study Academic help Provided for students Center for all students groups through center; writing help in Engineering LLC staffed by TA’s for minority student office center and Women in STEM help with early- LLC for common curriculum high failure Peer mentoring also Engineering college science and classes. includes tutoring in the offers Structured engineering courses small mentoring Supplemental
Paper ID #44485Board 174: Fostering Inclusivity and Engagement while Learning by Doing:A New Paradigm in Engineering Education Based on Student-Designed, Student-TaughtCoursesMr. Eliot Nathaniel Wachtel, University of California, Santa Cruz Eliot Wachtel is a fourth year Robotics Engineering Student, Student Instructor, Undergraduate Researcher, and Club leader at UC Santa Cruz. He has been involved in teaching and mentoring undergraduate peers in engineering concepts for three years, acting as the formal lead instructor for two undergraduate courses. When not teaching, or learning, he is doing research in the Braingeneers
engineering students to work effectively in teams, writing that“because of the increasing complexity and scale of systems-based engineering problems, there isa growing need to pursue collaborations with multidisciplinary teams of experts across multiplefields” [1, pp. 34–35]. ABET has similarly dedicated one of its seven student outcomes toteamwork, wording it as: “An ability to function effectively on a team whose members togetherprovide leadership, create a collaborative and inclusive environment, establish goals, plan tasks,and meet objectives” [2]. Research studies have also repeatedly underlined the importance ofdeveloping engineering students’ abilities to work in teams to meet industry needs [3], [4].As a result, there has been an increased
thinkingand other General Education objectives addressed in the course. Following the completion of thecourse materials, a curricular course proposal was submitted to UFS and underwent consultationprocedures. Ultimately, the proposal was approved by UFS in April 2018 and the course wasoffered to students for the first time in the fall of the same year.Throughout the course, students had access to a variety of fluid apparatus and were encouragedto experiment with creating novel flows. Each image produced by the students was required to beaccompanied by a write-up, which some of the art students found surprising. The student workwas then evaluated for both artistic and scientific merit, with an emphasis on developing anappreciation for the beauty of
form and Qualtrics. The purpose of the survey is twofold: a. Tounderstand what students’ expectations and the diversity in their expectations are, and b. To helpstudents actively recognize the diversity among their peers. Librarians can get a sense ofclassroom diversity by looking at the results of the survey. However, that alone does not advancethe concept of inclusion. According to McNair, inclusion is the “active, intentional, and ongoing engagement withdiversity—in the curriculum, in the co-curriculum, and in communities (intellectual, social,cultural, geographical) with which individuals might connect—in ways that increase awareness,content knowledge, cognitive sophistication, and empathic understanding of the complex