Department,George Mason UniversityArvin Farid, Ph.D., P.E., Professor, Civil Engineering, Boise State UniversityMojtaba Sadegh, Ph.D., Associate Professor, Civil Engineering, Boise State UniversityRafael da Silva, Ph.D., Assistant Professor, Organizational Performance and Workplace LearningDepartment, Boise State UniversityScott Lowe, Ph.D., Dean, Graduate College, Boise State UniversityKeywords: Graduate degrees, Engineering, Stakeholders, Support system, Higher Education 1 S-STEM: Challenges Stakeholders Face in Supporting Low-Income, First-Generation, and/or Rural Graduate Students There is a growing need to train
- dered if there was a way to validate and promote these discussions at the intersection of engineering, community, and identity as an integral part of STEM education and practice, when in their experience, they had often remained at the fringe or relegated to courses outside of the technical curriculum.Background and motivationScenario #0 above marks a turning point in the development of a course titled Effective andEnduring Advocacy: Leading with Compassion in STEM, catalyzing its transition from an earlyconcept into a fully supported Pilot Course [1]. We now offer the present work, a CollaborativeAutoethnography (CAE), which explores the impacts of the course on both students andfacilitators.Development of the Pilot Course
). Each measure used a seven-point Likert scale 6from (1) strongly agree to (7) strongly disagree. Questions throughout the scales wereappropriately reversed. Demographic information was collected.PositionalityKatharine Getz is a white lesbian who believes in the expansiveness of self, gender, andsexuality. Her motivation to research the experiences of belonging and identity for LGBTQ+undergraduate engineering students comes from her own experiences and observations of herpeers. Her academic background is in chemical engineering, sexuality and gender studies, andengineering education, and her mentor for this project comes from an experienced
significant disadvantage. Many face challenges catching up or may never evenbegin. Research highlights that institutional barriers like these contribute to lower completion ratesamong students from underrepresented gender, racial, and ethnic groups [1]. Similarly, the subjectsof this study i.e., first-generation college students (FGCS) [2] and non-traditional students (NTS)[3] also experience lower rates of degree completion compared to their peers due to the similarreasons. First-generation college students (FGCS) are the first in their immediate families to pursuecollege education (neither of their parents has a bachelor’s degree) [2]. The National Center forEducation Statistics (NCES) identifies seven key traits that distinguish NTS from
knowledgeinto new frameworks.Flexibility in topic, discussion, structure and partners is key to providing a meaningful classroomexperience for students, while also teaching engineers to remain nimble, contextual and criticalin thought as they evaluate solutions to a design problem.Incorporation of multiple professional and peer viewpoints, in the form of professional advisorsand alumni mentors, gives students diverse perspectives as well as comfortable resources toconsult outside of the classroom, and demonstrates that many approaches can exist in tackling adesign challenge.Bibliography 1. Atman, C. J.; Adams, R. S.; Cardella, M. E.; Turns, J.; Mosborg, S.; Saleem, J. Engineering Design Processes: A Comparison of Students and Expert
term learner gains 8,9To have a greater understanding of how this directly applies to deeper learning we need to take alook at Figure 1 below which graphically represents Webb’s Depth of Knowledge taxonomy.10As learning blocks are heavily focused on application of knowledge, many of the Do-It/Challenge-It sections revolved around Level 2-4 activities with the majority focusing on Level 3-4 activitiesbut scaled for time. What follows below is a sampling of two badges and two learning blocks.Badges incorporate all the various pieces from all of the learning blocks into a set of achievementsin a recognizable way. So a daily badge will require both completion of an engineering themedblock, an art themed block, a science themed block, a technology
predictors for later academic success and retention (Durdella & Kim, 2012). A statistical analysis based on data retrieved from U.S department of Education and theNational Center for Education Statistics, year 2011-12 is shown in Figure 1 (Molina, 2015). Amajority of veterans are currently enrolled in associate degree or certificate programs (54 %),and only 19 % are enrolled in public 4-year colleges. Their average age is 25, the majority ofthem have dependents (52%), are U.S. born (94%), white (63%), and male (79%). Only 20 % ofveterans are enrolled in STEM fields. Figure 1: Undergraduate student veterans by numbers (Molina, 2015) Strategies recommended for institutions to serve as a veteran friendly include: a
. References [1] Beam, T. K., Pierrakos, O., Constantz, J., Johri, A., & Anderson, R. (2009). Preliminary findings on freshmen engineering students' professional identity: Implications for recruitment and retention. Proceedings of the[2] Pierrakos, O., Beam, T. K., Constantz, J., Johri, A., & Anderson, R. (2009). On the development of a professional identity: engineering persisters vs. engineering switchers. Proceedings of the 39th Frontiers in Education Conference, San Antonio, TX. doi: 10.1109/FIE.2009.5350571[3] Matusovich, H. M., Barry, B. E., Meyers, K., & Louis, R. (2011). A multi-institution comparison of students’ development of an identity as an engineer. Proceedings of the 118th ASEE Annual
andcomputer science.This paper is focused on engineering students who are both transfer students and sophomores,even though they may be classified as upper division students due to their total number of earnedcredit hours. During the 2012-2013 academic year, 581 students transferred into engineering andcomputer science in the Ira A. Fulton Schools of Engineering at Arizona State University (ASU).Of this total, 458 were classified as upper division and 123 as lower division students. Thenumbers of new transfer students in fall 2013 are shown in Table 1. Lower Division Upper Division Total Fall 2013 Female 22 51 73 (15.7%) New Engineering & CS Male Transfers
the blending of science and engineeringas its first “conceptual shift,” combining the two into “Science and Engineering Practices”(NGSS, Appendix A). NGSS explains, “This integration is achieved by raising engineeringdesign to the same level as scientific inquiry in classroom instruction when teaching sciencedisciplines at all levels and by giving core ideas of engineering and technology the same status asthose in other major science disciplines” (NGSS, Appendix A). The following analysis examines how it addresses issues of equity and access in theimplementation of these “science and engineering practices.” To do this, the authors: 1. Examine the historical purposes of science and engineering education (as well as the connections
students. Students often express astrong sense of pride in becoming an engineer and believe that their hard work, perseverance,and ability to overcome rigorous challenges are a testament to their capability and worthiness inthe field.[1] However, the intense, high-pressure culture within engineering programs often takesa serious toll on students' mental health. Engineering students, even before the COVID pandemichit, were reporting higher levels of stress, anxiety, and depression than the general studentpopulation, but are less likely to seek help.[2-4] Their well-being is connected to whether theyfeel like the academic environment is supportive, hostile, or something in between.Culture change is a gradual process, requiring time, commitment, and
and skills in integratingaccessibility into product development. The course began with 35 students, the maximum enrollment limit, and concluded with29 students. It met once a week for 2 hours and 45 minutes. Each session was divided into two[THE SHIFT TOWARDS INCLUSION AND ACCESSIBILITY] 4parts: a 1 hour and 15-minute lecture covering the week’s topic, followed by a 15-minute break.The second half of the class involved interactive in-class activities to reinforce the lecture’sconcepts. Guest speakers from various companies specializing in accessibility and UX replacedsome lectures throughout the semester, sharing their professional experiences and insights. Students’ grades were
, helping men develop a personal motivation forengaging in gender equity efforts, utilizing male roles models, providing opportunities for male-only dialogues, and engagement in solution-building. Barriers include apathy, fear of status loss,and lack of knowledge about gender inequities15. Additional theory and research indicate thatthere are key stages in the development of an ally identity and effective ally behaviors16-21.Overall, there appears to be accord among investigators such that (1) potential allies must firstunderstand unearned advantage and how it works in their own lives as well as how it impacts thelives of systemically disadvantaged persons; (2) successful ally development approacheseducate, inspire, and support members of the
written, distributable articulation of suchpriorities is also felt to be required. But if we are interested in the social relations associatedwith engineering codes of ethics, we must ask: Why precisely is such an articulation felt to benecessary? After all, many features of many professional operations never find such formalexpression; although Codes of Ethics for History professors exist, they are rarely invoked inpractice or passed along for graduate students, for example. Moreover, although developing acode of ethics is commonly viewed as having been an essential part of engineering’sprofessionalization in the United States,1 the question of how codes of ethics actually shape dailyengineering practice is a, huge realm for study. To delve into
engineering education:A Mediated Discourse Analysis of student presentations in a first year projects course Page 26.880.3 Ideologies of depoliticization in engineering education: A Mediated Discourse Analysis of student presentations in a first year projects course1. IntroductionThis paper works toward two goals. The first is to build on our previous work on“becoming an engineer”,1 in which we have attempted to understand engineering learningwithin a broader framework that focuses not only on the development of knowledge orcognitive capacities, but also on additional dimensions, including the development ofidentities within social
Society for Engineering Education, 2015 1 Not engineering to help but learning to (un)learn: Integrating research and teaching on epistemologies of technology design at the margins Abstract Locating engineering education projects in sites occupied by marginalizedcommunities and populations serves primarily to reinforce themisapprehension that the inhabitants of such sites are illiterate, inept,incapable and therefore in need of aid or assistance from researchers, facultyand students. Drawing on the emerging literature on engineering educationand social justice, I examine the stated objectives, content, duration, andoutcomes of exemplar projects
sometimes when I'm like I can't believe I suck at math, like why?” (1stinterview), “I guess career-wise maybe so I'm not very strong at math” (2nd interview), and thefollowing passage from the 3rd interview: I realized, like, one: I sucked at (ooh… gosh...). Um, you're probably gonna be sick of hearing me talk after this!... S: No no... R: 1- I suck at math. S: Ok... Page 26.1582.6 R: I don't suck, I was, was pretty weak at math. I didn't have natural. My sister has a lot more aptitude for learning math.The repetition of this theme, in both 1st and 2nd person speech, suggests that this is a
on the scenarios and open-endedquestions related to issues of sexual harassment.Participants:A total of 96 subjects participated in this study, although not every participant responded toevery scenario. We have clarified the numbers of participants responding to each scenario in the Page 26.1434.3results section. Participants consisted of engineering students (19 female; 14 male), facultymembers (19 female; 14 male), and professionals (27 female; 11 male). Students and facultywere recruited from universities ranging from research 1 to smaller, liberal arts schools. Studentswere predominantly sophomores and juniors, while faculty members all
communication skills among students in C-I courses. Results from C-Icourse completion questionnaires showed that we still had some room to improve our students’perception of the value of the communication assignments they completed (see Figure 1).However, results also indicated that students realized that improving their communication skillswas essential for careers in engineering (see Figure 2). 180 160 140 120 100 Fall 2007 80 Spring 2008 60 40 20 0 Very Little Little Somewhat Much Very MuchFigure 1: Student responses to question, “How much did the
unrealistic and difficult to relate to their own circumstances.2,3 Over the course of everydayengineering design work, many students do not realize they are engaging in ethical processes atall,2,4 and have little to no recognition of how their considerations shape and are shaped by theorganizational context of the program. Indeed, it is often only on looking back “after thingsturned out nasty” that reasoning seemingly unrelated to ethics may be identified as ethical.1 Likewise, students may not recognize that engineering design is inherently tied to ethics.However, the products of an engineering design process, and especially the use of thoseproducts, undoubtedly are.1 Scholars have argued that ethical issues arise on a day-to-day basisin the
illustrating how courses taught in a higher education makerspace meet long-standing design education goals (such as design across the curriculum). This paper presents thebenefits of makerspace-hosted design courses, highlighting three models that illustrate the abilityof a higher education makerspace to improve design education.Design Education: History and ChallengesThe importance of design as a component of engineering education is stressed in Fiesel’s (et al.)description of engineering as “a hands-on profession where doing is key.”1 According to Fiesel, akey aspect of the profession is to design, analyze, and build creations that harness and modifyenergy, materials, and information to solve problems and improve humanity’s standard of living.The
that they are active participants and partners with scientists. Recent discussionsof CER are explicit in recognizing a continuum of engagement [1],[2]. CER is an umbrella ideaunder which more defined sub-types are found including community-based participatoryresearch (CBPR) [3]. A rough conceptual idea of forms of academic engagement withcommunities is shown in Figure 1, where areas within the gray box represent different forms andintensity of engagement. The activities located closer to the right side of the box represent moreleadership and agency by communities and therefore may be more likely to meet their goals. Figure 1. Examples of different
ofcommunities while introducing foundational engineering concepts. Drawing on culturallysustaining pedagogy and positionality theory, this study analyzes how the identities of instructorsshaped lesson design and delivery, and how students’ engagement with engineering wasinterpreted through a multimodal and multilingual lens. Data sources included instructorjournals, field notes, and community conversations. The thematic analysis highlights (1) theinfluence of instructors’ own definitions of engineering on classroom interactions; (2) the role ofheritage language use in building trust; and (3) students' creative engagement with materials,which surfaced localized forms of engineering not always recognized in traditional curricula.This WIP illustrates the
intentionally create possibility: 1. Find your purpose and declare a statement of possibility 2. Communicate and enroll others into possibility 3. Define a project, event, program or initiative 4. Layout a plan 5. Get into action 6. Acknowledge and Celebrate along the way2.3.4 Using Intentional Possibility in LearningPeople that live in possibility develop a number of traits we wish to develop in our students.They are driven, motivated, engaged, focused and prone to openly accept and handleadversity as challenge.By engaging students in possibility and having them enrol volunteers to develop a project thatimpacts between 50 and 200 people, we can provide an environment in which the studentincreases resiliency, self-confidence and
women’s participation in STEM, and related topics grew steadily from the 1970s onward [1],[2]. In the last two decades or so, an investment in programs that support broadeningparticipation with a lens of diversity, equity and inclusion has been prioritized in these and otheragencies. The 2024–2026 vision for NSF (produced in 2022) explicitly calls for “A nation thatleads the world in science and engineering research and innovation, to the benefit of all, withoutbarriers to participation” [3]. The NSF strategic plan further articulates core values which arethen specified within the agency’s individual programs: 1) Scientific leadership 2) Diversity andinclusion 3) Integrity and excellence 4) Public service and 5) Innovation and collaboration [3
Republic’s students produce and ship more than 40,000wreaths, each year, to destinations throughout the United States and around the world5.Figure 1. (Left) Boys’ Republic Christmas Wreath. (Right) Final assembly and production of the wreaths. Notice along the backwall the hook line assembly line that travels throughout the various assembly areas.The challenge the engineering team addressed for this aspect of the wreath production was theapplication of the clear lacquer sealant. The project’s primary goal was to replace the manualapplication of the lacquer which can expose the workers to various chemicals if they are notwearing the necessary protection and while also alleviating the long days that can cause theworkers to become fatigued while
(CCs). The authors suspected that these transfer students might just be the tip of a large icebergof students who sought and could benefit strongly from a “supportive hand.” 1 There were noprograms at that time specifically for new transfer students in ENGR; the only option availableto learn about life at a large school for these students was to join freshmen students in an ASU101 introductory class. Transfer students averaging age 25 are not particularly enthralled to be inclass with 18 year olds who are very interested in what happened in the dorm last night. The firstauthor and director of the NSF STEM for upper division students then wrote a second successfulproposal (#0324212) to NSF to support upper division transfer students in an S
sciences.Contents, tools and services provided by COPEC, through courses, publications and consultationswith national and international experts, contribute to the promotion of the professional who wantsto be privy of the new achievements and the service of man to technology.COPEC enjoys respect and recognition internationally characterized by the open discussion, thefree exchange of ideas, respectful debate, and a commitment to rigorous inquiry. Its IIE –International Institute of Education - is a bold and resilient source of innovation in highereducation [1].Educational Aspects in Current RealityWork environment worldwide has changed drastically, and today millions of professionals arealso unemployed, even in advanced economies. On the other hand
themtime, productivity, and sanity. It typically takes them 4–5 years to become as productive inresearch and as effective in teaching as they ever become. The other 5%—the “quickstarters”—meet or exceed their institution’s expectations for research productivity and score inthe top quartile of teaching evaluations in their first 1–2 years on the faculty. Boice foundthings the quick starters do that the other new faculty doesn’t do, and he also found thatthose strategies can be effectively taught.Most of us on college faculties learn our craft by trial-and-error. We start teaching anddoing research, make lots of mistakes, learn from some of them, teach some more and domore research, make more mistakes and learn from them, and gradually more or less
we have been working.Much has already been published on this program, including the evolution of CIRC.1-6 Majorhighlights will be discussed.Program HighlightsThe goals of this scholarship program have remained the same through its history. The first goalis to graduate the student. The second goal is that they will graduate in good stead with anexcellent set of experiences in addition to the classroom, including internships and researchpositions. A third goal is that the student will go right on to graduate school full-time aftergraduation and earn an engineering or computer science Master’s or Ph.D. degree. Everythingdone in this program is designed to help the student reach these three goals.An Academic Success and Professional Development