supervisors, peers, subordinates, clients, and others. With support from National ScienceFoundation grant EEC #1158728, the present study used a newly developed online deliverysystem to provide personalized multisource feedback to a sample of 206 undergraduate STEMstudents in a science and technology problem-solving course. PersonalityPad.org is anautomated multisource feedback platform that allows users to generate their own personalizedmultisource feedback. This process incorporates prevalent 360-degree feedback strategies and“best practices” for effective feedback administration. A longitudinal experiment within aninterventional framework evaluated the hypothesis that multisource conscientiousness feedbackwould provoke goal-directedness and
Formulas. This iswhen students believe they should follow the plans that have been laid out for them by externalvoices of authority. They allow others to define who they are, including parents, teachers, socialnorms and expectations, peers, etc. The second phase is Crossroads. This is when studentsrealize that following the plans others have set before them may not necessarily match their owninterests and desires and they become discontented with allowing others to define who they are,and they begin to create their own sense of self that is preferably more authentic. Yet, whilestudents want to become more true to themselves, at this phase, they are exceedingly concernedwith how others will react to their decisions and the effects on their
formidable communicative, embodied resources forgrounding principles in STEM. Discussing torsion, a student may enact angular deformation bygesturally communicating their emerging understanding to peers (see Figure 1). Gestures canindicate a students’ reasoning processes as sensorimotor activity is engaged in problem solvingand analysis [7; see Figure 1]. In engineering, students and instructors often produce gestures whilereasoning about physical and mathematical phenomena [9] and carry nonverbal information thatcomplements verbal reasonings [10]. Grondin and colleagues [10] catalogued the gestures engineering students produced in anengineering lab as they mechanically reasoned about the concept of torsion. These gestures oftendepicted the
programs are a critical mechanism for enhancing teaching effectiveness(e.g., [9], [10], [11]). These programs aim to equip educators with the necessary skills andknowledge to improve their teaching methods, such as integrating technology, employinginnovative assessment strategies, and centering student learning [12]. Research indicates thatcomprehensive faculty development programs that include workshops, peer and studentfeedback, and communities of practice can significantly enhance faculty teaching abilities andstudent learning experiences [13]. In STEM, these programs offer faculty members theopportunity to engage with contemporary pedagogical theories and practices, participate in amulti-disciplinary learning community, practice active
, predictthe structural response to load of an aircraft component (e.g., a wing section) through analysisand simulation, and attempt to verify the structural response predictions through the manufactureand test of a test article representative of the component. A design-build-fly option is alsoavailable for some teams who choose to further evaluate their designs through flight test. Allteams must document their work, both in writing and in a series of formal presentations. Becauseof the numerous objectives and tight schedule, AE 421 is a high stress environment that can leadto conflict between team members, conflict which might hinder student productivity. Tomaximize student communication skills and to minimize team conflict, AE 421 is
focused on youth with these identities.Search strategyWe used a standard systematic review approach following the PRISMA guidelines [23]. Wesearched three education-related databases: ERIC (EBSCO), Education Source, and AustralianEducation Index (also known as “International ERIC”). We composed a search string usingkeywords for concepts related to our objective (Table 1), and completed the search in December2023. We limited our search to 1993 onward, papers written in English, and peer-reviewedresearch work.Table 1: Search terms used. Search strings for each concept were combined with AND to createan overall search string. Note that listing “science” or “engineering” alone in the content conceptgave many extraneous results, so content and type
AC 2012-4360: IMPROVING UPON BEST PRACTICES: FCAR 2.0Dr. John K. Estell, Ohio Northern University John K. Estell is a professor of computer engineering and computer science at Ohio Northern Univer- sity. He received his doctorate from the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. His areas of research include simplifying the outcomes assessment process, first-year engineering instruction, and the pedagog- ical aspects of writing computer games. Estell is an ABET Program Evaluator, a Senior Member of IEEE, and a member of ACM, ASEE, Tau Beta Pi, Eta Kappa Nu, and Upsilon Pi Epsilon.Dr. John-David S. Yoder, Ohio Northern University John-David Yoder received all of his degrees (B.S., M.S., and Ph.D.) in mechanical
mother) woman. I am in the second year of my undergraduate engineering degree with aminor in Biomedical Engineering at a large HSI in the southwestern U.S. along the U.S.-Mexicoborder. Alongside my studies, I am a Research Assistant with an NSF IUSE-HSI grant, I work atthe front desk for our department, I have started a podcast to elevate the voices of my peers andmentors called “[Our Department] Inclusive Podcast”, and I am a barista at my church.As one of the contributing authors, I, Angelica Littles, identify as a cisgender AfricanAmerican/Filipina female. I am currently a second-year engineering student at a large HSI in thesouthwestern U.S. along the U.S.-Mexico border. In addition to my studies, I hold a TeachingAssistant position for a
teaches undergraduate courses in engineering & society, and graduate courses in engineering education. Lisa completed an Undergraduate Degree in Environmental Science at the University of Guelph, and a Master’s Degree in Curriculum Studies at the University of Toronto. Her current doctoral research focuses on teaching and learning in engineering with an emphasis on the teaching of STSE (Science, Technology, Society and the Environment). She has also conducted research on science teacher education, the first year university experience, the assessment of undergraduate research experiences, peer teaching and gender issues in science and engineering
theperception of dishonest peers and positively associated with understanding of academic integritypolicies.10 This research lends support to the idea that students require explicit education aboutacademic integrity.Yet, the ways in which faculty can infuse integrity education into the classroom has not beensystematically studied. Etter and colleagues proposed using the moral obligation andresponsibility that engineers have for the “health, safety, and welfare” of society as a way toencourage ethical reasoning and promote academic integrity in engineering students. Suggestedmethods for institutions include case-based learning, cooperative learning groups, and service-based learning.13 McCabe and Pavela suggested that faculty encourage honesty in their
cognizant of international student needs while integrating diversity 1718 activities into WIEP mentoring programs. We also recognized, as others have before that the international participants in our program could help to increase multicultural awareness for our domestic participants, while conversely, domestic students can support the integration of international peers into the university. While other studies related to cultural aspects of mentoring in education tend to focus on three primary themes surrounding the mentoring relationship, organizational structure, and “manner in which ethnicity and societal beliefs relate
Theory uses a formalized network diagraming convention to model environmentalsettings [13]. The network diagram consists of a Subject, Mediating Artifacts, Object, andOutcome. The Subject uses external (LMS, computer devices) and internal (plans, strategies)tools to complete an Object (milestone) thereby achieving a desired Outcome. The tools, alsoknown as Mediating Artifacts, are imbued with cultural, historical, and social significance.Mediating Artifacts influence the behavior of the Subject using them, and in turn, the largersocial environment the Subject inhabits. A simple example is shown in Fig. 1. A Subject(Student) is tasked with writing a report on “Activity Theory” (Outcome). The Student (Subject)uses ChatGPT, Wikipedia, and Google
acknowledge others’ perspectives(including peers and community members) and develop empathy and respect for others, evenwhen those perspectives are distant from them.3.2 Historical Positioning, Mapping, and Crafting PathwaysTo understand how the historical and political dimensions of engineering and development relateto their education and practice, stand in relation to their perspectives (see 3.1 above), andenhance or curtail their opportunities for community development work, students criticallyreflect on the history of engineering practice and education in the US. Through deep reading,analysis, and writing about works in the history of US engineering like [42]–[45] and the historyof development and engineers’ roles in it [10], [11], [46], students
the development, implementation, and assessment of model-eliciting activities with realistic engineering contexts.Matthew Verleger, Purdue University Matthew Verleger is a doctoral candidate in the School of Engineering Education at Purdue University. He received his B.S. in Computer Engineering and his M.S. in Agricultural and Biological Engineering, both from Purdue University. His research interests are on how students develop mathematical modeling skills through the use of model-eliciting activities and peer review as a pedagogical tool.Judith Zawojewski, Illinois Institute of Technology Judith Zawojewski is an Associate Professor of Mathematics and Science Education at Illinois
Ghaisas, University of Oklahoma Shalaka has pursued a B.A. in Economics and M.A. in English from Fergusson College. She has com- pleted her MS in Teaching and Curriculum from Syracuse University.Dr. Xun Ge, University of Oklahoma Dr. Xun Ge (University of Oklahoma, xge@ou.edu) is Professor of Instructional Psychology and Tech- nology in the Department of Educational Psychology, Jeannine Rainbolt College of Education, the Uni- versity of Oklahoma. Her research expertise involves the design of question prompts in scaffolding stu- dents’ complex and ill-structured problem solving and self-regulated learning. Dr. Ge (2004) developed a conceptual framework using question prompts and peer interactions to facilitate
be, you know, at least a half an hour of face-to-face and “get to know you” and so forth.However, this interviewee also believes that, in some cases, the communication practices of theother culture need to shift. She continues, “I have respected that pace for establishingrelationships initially but beyond that, I’ve been discussing this bias for face-to-face with someof my [UK] team and showing them how it can stop work from getting done. The delays thatoccur when you write something down for later [to be discussed at the next face-to-face meeting]vs. just picking up the phone and resolving it immediately, are significant.” Here, what is keyfrom this interviewee’s perspective is creating open communication about
and qualitative research methods. Dr. Nathan has secured over $20M in external re- search funds and has over 80 peer-reviewed publications in education and Learning Sciences research, as well as over 100 scholarly presentations to US and international audiences. He is Principal Investiga- tor or co-Principal Investigator of 5 active grants from NSF and the US Dept. of Education, including the AWAKEN Project (funded by NSF-EEP), which examines learning, instruction, teacher beliefs and engineering practices in order to foster a more diverse and more able pool of engineering students and practitioners, and the Tangibility for the Teaching, Learning, and Communicating of Mathematics Project (NSF-REESE), which explores
or early spring, the REEMS program sponsors materials professionals in“brown bag” seminars to discuss their careers, their academic backgrounds, and are asked toreview the mentors, teachers, and faculty who influenced their decisions that led them to theircurrent positions. The speakers conclude with words-of-wisdom to students regarding futurestudies and careers. Each of the professionals welcomes the opportunity to talk further withinterested students. Either in the fall or spring the REEMS PI, in collaboration with HCC student services,sponsors a series of student development workshops that emphasize the development of skills intime management, resume writing, and how to apply for scholarships, internships, collegetransfer, and
forces compellinguniversities towards professional doctorates. Specifically for XXX University, as a nationallyranked land grant STEM-intensive institution, it is obligated, i.e., compelled, by its land grantmission to bring practical knowledge and capability to the constituencies it serves – and businessand industries as well as individual people are the two most important constituencies!Furthermore, in the move towards a knowledge economy and for the foreseeable future, theimportance of the need for advancing of technology, innovation and related entrepreneurship18and intrapreneurship was noted by Wessner19 writing for the National Research Council. Alsoacting are cultural influences such as those in Germany where senior executives have earned
tryexperimenting with other AI-powered techniques that are likely to become more common inengineering education and higher education at large.IntroductionThe rise of ChatGPT, and other generative AI tools, has led to a number of debates in educationas to what this means for teaching and learning. From early on in its release, multiple newsarticles point out the many ways students are using it in classes and how instructors have had toadapt—from changing how and where students write drafts or shifting to oral exams [1], tofocusing on thinking processes or return to pen and paper [2]—and the debate around its use inhigher education has intensified with continued uncertainty. The Digital Education Council(DEC) Global AI Student Survey, which ran in 2024
use of experimental centric pedagogy in a variety of settings and through multiple methods; the most frequent use was in a laboratory course with peers. Table 2 Use of ADB in Varied Instructional Modalities* Pre Post Instructional Modality Median % Used Median % Used Response 6+ times Response 6+ times Location/Setting of Use In a class setting Never 10 3 times
at the university level and as they pursue careers in industry. Graduating this December, she hopes to retain this knowledge for the benefit of herself and other women engineers as she pursues an industry career.Dr. Jon A. Leydens, Colorado School of Mines Jon A. Leydens is Associate Professor of Engineering Education Research in the Division of Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences at the Colorado School of Mines, USA. Dr. Leydens’ research and teaching interests are in engineering education, communication, and social justice. Dr. Leydens is author or co- author of 40 peer-reviewed papers, co-author of Engineering and Sustainable Community Development (Morgan and Claypool, 2010), and editor of Sociotechnical
learning goals and explore potential new learninggoals.Qualitative DataA total of 297 weekly reflection papers and 27 final papers from 27 undergraduate studentsacross two independent cohorts served as the source of data for this qualitative research study.For the weekly reflection papers, the students were asked to reflect on their experiences duringthe weekly T-Group. The students were asked to write a reflection about situations which had asignificant impact on them. The weekly reflection papers enabled the author to perform alongitudinal analysis in regards to the student’s development of their authentic leadership skillsand to conduct triangulation of the data between individuals, peers, and facilitator.For the final papers (min. 3,500 words
Feminist Research 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
to understand and do well in thesubject (or competence and performance), and recognition by meaningful others (e.g., peers,instructors, family, etc.)[42], [43]. This framing is based on prior work in science education.Carlone and Johnson [44] developed a framework for science role identity from interviews withwomen of Color professionals that included performance, competence, and recognition. Later, intranslating this framework to undergraduate students in physics, Hazari and colleagues [45] addedinterest as an important facet of the student experience and developed quantitative measuresassociated with the four constructs. They found that for undergraduate students, performance andcompetence were not two separate factors but rather a single
moredisposed to read discipline-based journals. Part-time faculty do not report spending asubstantially different amount of time on professional development” (p. 61)31.A study by Keim and Biletzky35, which focused on professional development and evaluations ofpart-time faculty at community colleges, found that there was a need for development activitiesand thorough teaching evaluations. They recommended that part-time faculty receive feedbackfrom peers and administrators on their teaching in addition to student evaluations. Theysuggested that the student end-of-course evaluations were often incomplete and did not provideenough detail to improve teaching and classroom performance.Roueche, Roueche, & Milliron36 found that community college
and identifying as people of color. This paper attempts to shedlight in this area.Conceptual FrameworksOur conceptual framework is underpinned by the hidden curriculum and funds of knowledgetheories with intersectionality to elevate systems-driven implications.Hidden curriculum. Villanueva et al. write “Within educational and professional environmentsand settings, individuals don’t just learn ‘what is formally being presented . . . but alsoaccumulate other hidden lessons in the process’ [27, p. 1550]. The hidden curriculum inengineering is likely a significant factor in enculturating and socializing people into themeritocratic, hegemonic, and masculine norms of engineering [27]. Hidden curriculum duringgraduate education is receiving
it to provide context for the concepts, especially in a theory-rich,math-heavy classes such as Aerodynamics. In each class, students and the instructor writes several pages1 Assistant Professor, Mechanical and Aerospace Department, University of Dayton. gunasekarans1@udayton.edu Page 1 of 44of equations deriving the above-mentioned theories. With the plethora of modern active learning techniquesavailable, the instructor faces another challenge to select an appropriate technique which can be used in thistype of class not only to keep the students engaged but also to convey the significance of the equations andmake relevant connections to foster understanding. Even when active learning
point in the past was negotiated with the otherdepartments in sort of an agreement that they came to in how the students will be graded. I don'treally know the details of that it's been there for longer than I have…And we've just kind of keptdoing that same thing.” It must be noted that instructors had autonomy to write their own midterm exams as Jacknoted that the instructors were “responsible for making the tests for their sections,” but not thefinal exam as the final was a standardized, multiple-choice exam for all sections and was writtenby the course supervisor. In triangulating this finding with the public documents from the institution, such as thefaculty and student handbooks, it showed consistency in one dimension and
. Students enter the program as rising juniors orseniors, and instructors are Ph.D. students with at least a year left in graduate school. As such,these former students are, at the time of writing, in high school (in 11th or 12th grade), their firstyear of college, or their second year of college. All former instructors are currently in academiccareers, including continuing as Graduate Research Assistants, Postdoctoral Researchers andFellows, Research Engineers, and Teaching Professors. Students have enrolled in Purdue’sengineering programs and indicated a preference for civil engineering, but no formal statisticsare maintained on previous students.The course was first taught in the summer of 2020 and continues to be conducted every summer.Due to