Domenic M¨onnich is currently studying Automotive Engineering at the University of Applied Sciences Joanneum Graz. After completion of his studies, he aspires to work in the field of research and develop- ment.Mr. Christian J. Steinmann, Joanneum University of Applied Sciences, Austria Christian Steinmann has an engineer degree in mathematics from the Technical University Graz, where he focused on software quality and software development process assessment and improvement. He is man- ager of HM&S IT-Consulting and provides services for SPiCE/ISO 15504 and CMMI for development as a SEI-certified instructor. He performed more than 100 process assessments in software development de- partments for different companies
South AsiaData CollectionData was collected via semi-structured, one-to-one interviews in the middle of October 2022.The interview protocol was developed to guide participant to reflect on their team experienceschronologically and capture their reactions to the team interaction and dynamics. We focused onsoliciting significant milestones and key events from the participants and attempting tounderstand the roles of everyone in the team and how the person(s) influenced the dynamics.Therefore, we drafted the protocol based on the framework of Tuckman’s team developmentalsequence model [11-12] discussed in the literature review section above. Our research teamcarefully examined and revised the interview protocol to ensure the quality, relevance
andassessments.References[1] J. L. Segil, J. F. Sullivan, B. A. Myers, D. T. Reamon, and M. H. Forbes, “Analysis of multi-modal spatial visualization workshop intervention across gender, nationality, and other engineering student demographics,” in 2016 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), Erie, PA, USA: IEEE, Oct. 2016, pp. 1–5. doi: 10.1109/FIE.2016.7757525.[2] S. A. Sorby, “Developing 3D spatial skills for engineering students,” Australas. J. Eng. Educ., vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 1–11, Jan. 2007, doi: 10.1080/22054952.2007.11463998.[3] R. Gorska, S. A. Sorby, and C. Leopold, “Gender differences in visualization skills - An international perspective,” Eng. Des. Graph. J., vol. 62, no. 3, 1998.[4] R. Wodak and M. Meyer
. 4, pp. 454–467, 2014.[8] UNESCO. Engineering: Issues, Challenges and Opportunities for Development. Paris, França, 2010[9] F. R. Cordeiro, C. A. Paslauski, P. Wachs, and M. A. C. Tinoco, “Production engineers profiling: competences of the professional the market wants,” Production, vol. 30, 2020.[10] L. J. Shuman, M. Besterfield-Sacre, and J. McGourty, “The ABET ‘professional skills’—Can they be taught? Can they be assessed?,” J. Eng. Educ., vol. 94, no. 1, pp. 41–55, 2005.[11] K. E. Matthews, J. Firn, S. Schmidt, and K. Whelan, “A comparative study on student perceptions of their learning outcomes in undergraduate science degree programmes with differing curriculum models,” Int. J
collected in the survey was gender, race/ethnicity, major(s), graduation year, and minor(s). The authors selected these demographics to identify possible correlations between these variables and student engagement in engineering clubs and any concomitant increases or decreases in skill development and self-efficacy.A complete list of survey questions can be found in Appendix A. 2) Data CollectionSurvey participants were recruited through email and listservs. The survey was distributed byfaculty members to undergraduates in all engineering majors and class years. In soliciting surveyresponses, the Directors of Undergraduate Study were contacted to help with dissemination.Professors in Mechanical Engineering and Biomedical
National Academies Press, 2013. [Online]. Available: http://www.nextgenscience.org/[2] C. M. Cunningham and W. S. Carlsen, “Precollege engineering education,” in Handbook of research on science education, N. G. Lederman and S. K. Abell, Eds., New York, NY: Routledge, 2014, pp. 747–758.[3] NRC, A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2012. doi: 10.17226/13165.[4] C. M. Cunningham and G. J. Kelly, “Epistemic practices of engineering for education,” Sci. Educ., vol. 101, no. 3, pp. 486–505, May 2017, doi: 10.1002/sce.21271.[5] M. Johnson, G. Kelly, and C. Cunningham, “Failure and Improvement in Elementary Engineering,” J. Res. STEM Educ
Provost forproviding funding and resources to initiate this pilot project.This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No.2141984. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in thismaterial are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NationalScience Foundation.The authors would also like to thank Dr. Hammam Alsafrjalani and Berk Basarer for theircontribution to the app development and testing.10. References[1] M. Billinghurst, H. Kato, and S. Myojin, "Advanced Interaction Techniques for Augmented Reality Applications," presented at the Virtual and Mixed Reality, Third International Conference, VMR 2009, San Diego, CA, July 19-27, 2009.[2
individual interview transcripts that occurred following the Qsortactivity, and individual interview transcripts (when applicable) that occurred as part of the annualresearch data collection for the NSF program. Participants from this study participate as S-STEMscholars in a collaborative National Science Foundation (NSF) grant serving students from twofour-year institutions in the same state. One institution (Institution A) is described on theCarnegie classification structure as a “Four-Year, Full-Time, Selective, Lower Transfer-In”institution. The institution is predominantly male (more than 70% male) and white, though itsinstitutional enrollment of Hispanics reach approximately 30%. The enrollment diversity of thecomputer science department is
of Jean’s experiences with the findings ofO'Shea and Stone [16], involving women returning to education, as was the case of Jean.References[1] Carrigan, C., Hauser, J., Riskin, E. A., Mody-Pan, P., Borgford-Parnell, J., Wiggin, D., Winter, S., Pinkham, S, & Cunningham, S. (2019). Active agents and fictive kin: Learning from Pell-eligible engineering students' class standpoint. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 25(2).[2] Ceglie, R. (2011). Underrepresentation of women of color in the science pipeline: The construction of science identities. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 17(3).[3] Neumann, M. D., Lathem, S. A., & Fitzgerald-Riker, M. (2016). Resisting
this issue by directly examining students’Scavenger Hunt assignment submissions. Specifically, this qualitative work will explore genderdifferences in the ways in which AE students experience and demonstrate vocational purpose. References[1] J. H. Schuh, S. R. Jones, S. R. Harper, & Associates, Student services: A handbook for theprofession, 5th ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2011.[2] D. G. Young. (2020). Is first-year seminar type predictive of institutional retention rates?Journal of College Student Development, 61(3), 379-390.[3] K. L. Morgan, C. L. Bell-Huff, J. Shaffer, J. M. LeDoux, “Story-driven learning: Apedagogical approach for promoting students’ self-awareness and empathy for
, M. S., Dorime-Williams, M. L., & Tillman-Kelly,D. L. (2014). Measuring the educational benefits of diversity in engineering education: A multi-institutional survey analysis of women and underrepresented minorities. Retrieved fromhttps://commons.erau.edu/publication/292.3 Pucha, R., & Dunbar, T. (2022). SDG-focused project-based learning in engineering designcourses with diversity and inclusion interventions, ASEE SE Conference, Charleston, South Car-olina.4 Yosso, T. J. (2005). Whose culture has capital? A critical race theory discussion of communitycultural wealth. Race ethnicity and education, 8(1), 69-91.5 Moalosi, R., Popovic, V., & Hickling-Hudson, A. (2010). Culture-orientated product de-sign. International journal of
undergraduateonline engineering courses, we conducted a scoping review with the following research question:In what ways has scholarship addressed potential interrelationships between sense of belonging;online undergraduate engineering education; and diversity, equity, and inclusion?Literature on Sense of BelongingMaslow [8] explained that after physiological and safety needs are met, the need for love and tobelong emerges. Belonging is necessary for all human beings to achieve their full potential. Theconstruct of belongingness was well established by the early 2000’s and has been applied inschool and college settings (see Strayhorn [7] for a comprehensive review). Strayhorn [7] definessense of belonging as “students’ perceived social support on campus, a
–90, Feb. 1990, doi: 10.1901/jaba.1990.23-483.[5] W. P. Hung, “Clicker Clicks It,” Jun. 2011, p. 22.330.1-22.330.12, Accessed: Nov. 12, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://peer.asee.org/clicker-clicks-it.[6] C. Demetry, “Use Of Educational Technology To Transform The 50 Minute Lecture:,” Jun. 2005, p. 10.1385.1-10.1385.11, Accessed: Nov. 12, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://peer.asee.org/use-of-educational-technology-to-transform-the-50-minute-lecture.[7] L. V. D. Einde, S. H. Lee, and J. L. Le, “Incorporating Clickers and Peer Instruction into Large Structural Engineering Classrooms,” Jun. 2012, p. 25.759.1-25.759.19, Accessed: Nov. 12, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://peer.asee.org/incorporating-clickers-and-peer
://www.acenet.edu/Documents/Mapping- Internationalizationon-US-Campuses-2012-full.pdf.[3] Open Doors Report, “Number of International Students in the United States Hits All-Time High,” 2019. https://www.iie.org/en/Why-IIE/Announcements/2019/11/Number-of- International-Students-in-the-United-States-Hits-All-Time-High (accessed Dec. 09, 2020).[4] S. B. Twombly, M. H. Salisbury, S. D. Tumanut, and P. Klute, “Special Issue:Study Abroad in a New Global Century: Renewing the Promise, Refining the Purpose,” ASHE Higher Education Report, vol. 38, no. 4, pp. 1–152, 2012, doi: 10.1002/aehe.20004.[5] K. W. Dean and M. B. Jendzurski, “Using Post-Study-Abroad Experiences to Enhance International Study,” Honors in Practice, vol. 9, pp. 99–111, Jan
group may be composed of several teammembers with the same functional role and different team role(s). The nine current Belbin TeamRoles are described in Table 1. Each Team Role is defined by six factors: (1) personality; (2)mental ability; (3) current values and motivation; (4) field constraints; (5) experience; and (6)role learning [15]. Of particular relevance to the VIP Teams’ structure are the connections thatBelbin established between the following six stages of a team’s development and the need forprevailing Team Roles at each stage: (1) identifying needs; (2) finding ideas; (3) formulatingplans; (4) making ideas; (5) establishing team organization; and (6) following through [14].The Belbin Team Roles have been operationalized through
edu-cational setting. Future work will examine if the online offering of EGGN 100 impacted theretention of students.AcknowledgmentsThe author(s) acknowledge that the research work presented in this manuscript is based upon thestudent participants who were enrolled with the National Science Foundation-funded grant,“Building Capacity: Advancing Student Success in Undergraduate Engineering and ComputerScience” under NSF grant number: 1832536.” The contribution of Co-author Sudarshan Kurwad-kar is directly supported through this grant. References1. Mills, J. E, Treagust, D. F. (2003). Engineering Education – Is Problem-based or Project-based Learning the Answer. Australian Journal of Engineering Education http
minority groups may experienceadditional challenges while pursuing STEM degrees and careers [30]. Future research by thisteam will focus on further demographic assessment of the responses. The process will include(1) a similar survey with recruitment specifically targeted at underrepresented women in STEMto identify any additional challenges they may face, and (2) further data analysis of the existingdata set to assess differences between women in academia vs. non-academic jobs. Finally, sincethis survey was completed pre-COVID future assessment will be conducted to determine thechange in women’s challenges/needs during and post-pandemic.References[1] S. Fayer, A. Lacey, and A. Watson, “STEM Occupations: Past, Present, And Future,” p. 35.[2] Y
implies both a temporal dimension, in which organizations are improving all thetime, and a spatial dimension, in which organizations are improving all of their departments,units or divisions. In order to accomplish CI, Deming proposes utilizing the Plan-Do-Check-Act(PDCA) cycle for improvement at any stage [2]. PDCA is a 4-step cycle that repeatscontinuously through which organizations create a plan, execute it, review the results, and finallymake any corrective action before starting again.While Deming’s work was mainly directed towards business, academia took notice. The terms“Continuous Improvement” and “Total Quality Management” started to show up in highereducation research papers by the late 1980’s and early 1990’s [3]. CI then found its
1.16languageI participate in cultural events within my tribal community when 3.77 1.06 3.80 0.97possibleI know some of my tribe’s history 3.94 0.94 4.00 0.85I can identify important leaders for my tribe 3.76 1.07 3.67 1.09I can identify important social, health, political, or economic issues 3.78 1.07 3.76 1.07for my tribeI believe it is important to maintain and/or revitalize our Indigenous 3.80 1.14 3.78 1.15language(s
Award for Excellence in Service-Learning. Dr. Vernaza does research in engineering education (active learning techniques) and high-strain deformation of materials. Recently, she has focused on systemic strategies for the retention and advancement of STEM faculty and students, and academic in- terventions to improve student success. She is currently the Principal Investigator of a $1 million dollar National Science Foundation S-STEM award (2017-21), and she has secured over $2.5 million in grants during her tenure at Gannon University. She is currently the PI of an NSF S-STEM and ADVANCE-PAID grants.Dr. Saeed Tiari, Gannon University Dr. Saeed Tiari is an Associate Professor in the Biomedical, Industrial and Systems
definitions and descriptions, an alternative workingdefinition for troubleshooting would be a type of problem solving that analyzes a faulty systemto identify the fault(s) in the system and then pursue the appropriate procedures to correct thefault(s) in a timely manner.Engineering is one of the domains where well-developed troubleshooting skills can frequentlymake a substantial impact, e.g., when an engineer finds and fixes a problem that has shut down amass transit line. Significantly, it has been observed that the engineers entering industry havepoorly developed troubleshooting skills because they gain little hands-on experience and theyunderuse test equipment in the typical U.S. undergraduate engineering curriculum [5]. Morerecently (in 2018
, and across questions posed by students and instructors, individually. Thehigh frequency of generative design questions is particularly meaningful when compared to twoanalogous studies of peer critiques within a conventional face-to-face setting, in which low-levelquestions were more prevalent. These findings overall support written, asynchronous designcritiques as a useful mode for enhancing exchanges of feedback between student peers.References[1] M. Mandala, C. Schunn, S. Dow, M. Goldberg, J. Pearlman, W. Clark, and I. Mena, “Impact of collaborative team review on the quality of feedback in engineering design projects”, International Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 34, no. 4., pp. 1299-1313, 2018.[2] B. Lawson
Oxford, UK. Professor Zilouchian is senior member of several professional societies including Tau Beta Pi, Sigma Xi, Phi Kappa Phi, ASEE and IEEE.Dr. Nancy Romance , Florida Atlantic University Dr. Romance is Professor of Science/Engineering Education and Director of FAU’s STEM Collaborative. She is currently PI on the Title III Hispanic Serving Institution STEM Articulation grant and Co-PI on the College of Engineering and Computer Science’s NSF S STEM grant guiding engineering majors toward completion of a MS degree in Artificial Intelligence. Her work is focused extensively on science and engi- neering activities to promote enhanced classroom engagement of students and increased discipline-based educational
Paper ID #29057The Design and Impact of a Combined Makerspace, Wet Lab, andInstructional Design Studio for Chemical Engineering CurriculumProf. Anthony Butterfield, University of Utah Anthony Butterfield is an Associate Professor (Lecturer) in the Chemical Engineering Department of the University of Utah. He received his B. S. and Ph. D. from the University of Utah and a M. S. from the University of California, San Diego. His teaching responsibilities include the senior unit operations laboratory, capstone laboratory, first year design laboratory, and the introduction to chemical engineering. His research interests focus
. Grinder, and R. J. Ross, “A paradigm shift! The internet, the web, browsers, Java, and the future of computer science education,” SIGCSE Bull. (Association Comput. Mach. Spec. Interes. Gr. Comput. Sci. Educ., 1998.[3] J. MIRO-JULIA, “Dangers of the Paradigm Shift.”[4] D. Veisz, E. Z. Namouz, S. Joshi, and J. D. Summers, “Computer-aided design versus sketching: An exploratory case study,” Artif. Intell. Eng. Des. Anal. Manuf. AIEDAM, 2012.[5] M. Karima, K. Sadhal, and T. McNeil, “From paper drawings to computer-aided design,” IEEE Comput. Graph. Appl., no. 2, pp. 27–39, 1985.[6] M. Katajamaki, “Knowledge-Based CAD,” Expert Syst. Appl., vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 277–287, 1991.[7] A. K. Goel, S. Vattam, B
unique to Duke?," Duke Chronicle, 24 October 2017. [Online]. Available: https://www.dukechronicle.com/article/2017/10/with-large-classes-and-waitlists-compsci- feels-growing-pains-but-are-those-pains-unique-to-duke. [Accessed 1 January 2020].[5] G. V. Glass and M. L. Smith, "Meta-analysis of research on class size and achievement," Educational evaluation and policy analysis, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 2-16, 1979.[6] L. E. Winslow, "Programming pedagogy - a psychological overview," SIGCSE Bull., p. 17–22, 1996.[7] N. Bosch, S. D’Mello and C. Mills, "What emotions do novices experience during their first computer programming learning session?," in International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education, 2013.[8] E. J. Kim and K
Generation Science Standards: For States, By States. Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2013.[3] President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, Report to the President: Prepare and Inspire: K-12 Education in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) for America’s Future. Washington, DC: Executive Office of the President, 2010.[4] S. Brophy, S. Klein, M. Portsmore, and C. Rogers, “Advancing engineering education in P- 12 classrooms,” Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 97, pp. 369-387, July 2008.[5] E. A. Ring, E. A. Dare, E. A. Crotty, and G. H. Roehrig, “The evolution of teacher conceptions of STEM education throughout an intensive professional development
, 45-70.Beddoes, K., Jesiek, B.K., and Borrego, M. (2011). Fostering international engineering educationresearch collaborations: On the need to think beyond the workshop format, Australian Journal ofEngineering Education, 17, 2, 39-54.Biancani, S. Dahlander, L., McFarland, D. A. and Smith, S. (2018). Superstars in the making?The broad effects of interdisciplinary centers, Research Policy, 47, 3, 543-557.Boardman, P.C. and Corley, E. (2008). University research centers and the composition ofresearch collaborations, Research Policy, 37, 5, 900-913.Borrego, M. (2006). Discipline-based views of collaboration in engineering education researchpartnerships, Frontiers in Education Conference, San Diego, CA.Borrego, M, and Newswander L.K. (2008
: 1. Problem identification: ability to articulate problem/s based on information provided in the scenario 2. Information needs: ability to identify additional information needed to address the problem/s identified 3. Stakeholder awareness: ability to identify and include groups needed for decision- making 4. Goals: ability to identify short- and long-term goals towards addressing the problem/s identified 5. Unintended consequences: ability to identify possible limitations and unintended consequences of a potential solution 6. Implementation challenges: ability to identify expected barriers to their crafted response to the problem scenario 7. Alignment: degree to which the respondent
. noted in their work, these process based, cognitive theory approaches were derived either adhoc or through controlled experiments that use simple tasks. The suitability of these models fordesign problems that are much more complex has never been investigated. This lack ofinvestigation and difficulties met in process based measurements of ideation effectiveness ledShah et al. to consider outcome based metrics for their study of engineering design [7]. As such,Shah et al. developed a framework to measure ideation effectiveness in simple and complexdesign situations.Shah et al.’s framework includes metrics that measure the effectiveness of formal ideageneration methods. The framework addresses that engineering design must be novel – unusualand