Each (points) (points) (points) (points) (points) Item Professional, Peer-Reviewed & Communicated External Grants received 5 larger than $50,000 Published International Journal articles / Book 5 Chapters Published Articles; National or International 4 12 4 Conference Paper/Proceedings External grants received less than $50,000 but 4 more than $20,000 External grants received 3 6 6 less than $20,000 Research/poster presentations given at 3
relative to their peers - reflecting opportunity gaps but notdeficits in capability. To normalize each applicant, students summarize their skills and interestsin an application consisting of demographic information, short answers, and eight 200-500 wordessays. The essays focus on the lived experiences of each student, offering students an opportunityto demonstrate their qualifications for the CIRCUIT program in their (1) potential for leadership 3 Table 1: A summary of the CIRCUIT pillars and benefits to stakeholdersPillar Description Student Benefit Nation BenefitHolistic Student selection Critical enabler for Evidence-driven
Technology, only 25% of engineering degrees, includingBachelor’s, Master’s, and Ph.D., were awarded to women in US institutions [1]. Theunderrepresentation of women in engineering may be due to a lack of diversity when recruitingstudents, as well as the fact that women have higher attrition rates than their men peers, so-called“the leaky pipeline” [2, 3, 4].Many studies have attempted to understand this high attrition rate of women students inengineering careers. Some suggest that women students have fewer opportunities to develop theirengineering interests or chances to be recognized as engineers compared with their mencounterparts [5, 6, 7, 8, 9]. Others note that women students face additional professionaldevaluation and chilly climates in
Morehouse College. Dr. Gosha’s research interestsinclude conversational agents, social media data analytics, computer science education, broadening par-ticipation in computing and culturally relevant computing. More specifically, Gosha’s passion lies in hisresearch in virtual mentoring where he has several peer-reviewed research publications. Gosha’s Cultur-ally Relevant Computing Lab is comprised of approximately 10 top undergraduate researchers each yearfrom Morehouse College, Spelman College and Clark Atlanta University. The lab investigates researchproblems centered on creating innovative computing technologies to solve cultural problems and issues.To date, Dr. Gosha has accrued over $20 million dollars in sponsored research funding and over 60
Development – semester 1, weeks 9-15Customer Discovery Process Learning OutcomesIn-class Peer exercise (week 9) 1. Using Customer Discovery template, create 1. Align idea & design with actual customer survey on problem idea addresses needs 2. Survey peers 3. Compile implications of peer feedback 4. Revise survey per implicationsSurvey 10 potential customers (weeks 10-13) 1. Using Customer Discovery template, survey customers 2. Compile data and implications 3. Revise idea per implicationsStage 3: Prototype Development – semester 2, weeks 1-15Client Validation Process Learning Outcomes 1. Meet with
research by introducing students to research projects with a broader impact in terms of energy, the environment, and emerging scientific technologies. 3. Provide students with the opportunity to participate in all aspects of a scientific campaign, including research experience (laboratory work, literature review) and communication of scientific data (oral presentations, poster presentations, writing of manuscripts/peer-review process). 2Tier 1: Research methods/skill developmentThe first tier of eCURe involves recruitment and initial preparation of needed STEM skillsthrough CUREs within existing General Chemistry coursework or
Kwak Tanguay is a Ph.D. Candidate in Multicultural Education at the University of Washington. Her research examines how educational policy & practice, curriculum, and instruction mediate cross- racial and cross-ethnic peer relations among students, and how these peer relations shape students of color’s educational experiences, trajectories, and access to opportunities.Dr. Joyce Yen, University of Washington Joyce Yen, Ph.D., is the Director of the ADVANCE Center for Institutional Change at the University of Washington where she focuses on advancing women and underrepresented minority faculty in STEM fields and leading faculty professional development programs. Her diversity and faculty work has received over
enactment of liberatory pedagogy is discussed through the perspectives of JEDIalumni.2. Literature ReviewThis section includes a review of literature focused efforts that seek to improve the experiencesof marginalized undergraduate engineering students or support them in creating change in theirlocal university or community context.2.1. Student Support ProgramsPrevious scholarship indicates that interventions offered by diversity engineering programs(DEPs) and minority engineering programs (MEPs) can improve marginalized students’undergraduate experience [1]. In particular, both faculty and peer mentorship programs forhistorically oppressed students have been identified as powerful support mechanisms inundergraduate engineering education [2
drawing out content as a set of linked ideas, effectively visualizing the constructivistperception of knowledge gain. Jigsaw places more responsibility on the students, breaking theclass into groups and assigning one person from each group to become a subject-area expert on asubtopic (such as reading a specific journal article), and subsequently having each group memberteach their peers in the group the piece of the overall puzzle that they mastered. Finally, student-generated exam questions allow students to work through the key concepts learned during a unitthat deserve attention on an exam, anticipating many of the topics they will face while creatingone question that may be on the exam itself. These CATs provide an extensive list of places
often fewer formal opportunities to onboard new graduate students inresearch groups. As a result, students can experience difficulty with a lack of understandingexpectations and responsibilities, lack of communication with their mentors, and lack ofcommunity with their peers. To address these challenges and formalize the development of aculture, a civil engineering research group at a public research-intensive university in thesoutheastern United States participated in a retreat. The retreat took place over five days prior tothe start of the fall 2019 semester at an off campus location. The motivation for the retreat wasgrounded in John P. Kotter’s Leading Change process to create organizational transformationand improve the onboarding
technical contexts while making stronger connections to practice 1early in the undergraduate curriculum has been supported through numerous studies (Passow andPassow, 2017).The case for integrating oral and written communication curriculum into existing undergraduateengineering coursework is not a new idea (see ASEE Engineering Enhanced Liberal ArtsProject) with approaches that range from writing across the curriculum, to interdisciplinarycourses and integrated programs (Leydens and Schneider, 2009; Ford and Riley, 2003; Nutman,1987). The teaching of communication skills in ways that will more effectively transfer to futureworkplace expectations to learners is a widely recognized objective among
primary interest centers on postsecondary success for minoritized women and men in STEM fields. Following this interest, she has conducted re- search in several areas including the intersectionality of race and gender in engineering; including un- derstanding the culture, climate, and infrastructure of an engineering program (policies, organizational norms, interactions with faculty & peers, etc.) that may reinforce racial and gender stereotypes, engen- der feelings of racial and gender subordination, and disproportionately validate and privilege members of some racial groups at the expense of others.Tiffany D. Pan, University of Washington Tiffany Pan is a Graduate Research Assistant at the Center for Evaluation
theforums and traditions practiced in their field. Students responded to the prompt, What does‘ethics’ mean in the context of STEM fields? Why is thinking about ethics important for STEMstudents and professionals? Students then responded to discussion question in an online forumevery other week for 10 weeks. The peer-review occurred between paired students that read andoffered critiques of one another’s writing from different engineering subfields and then met inperson and shared their critiques with the professor and their peer-review partner. The fourthform of communication was publicly available on Twitter and students were required to post 10tweets during the semester.These encounters were designed to afford student with opportunities to engage
a new Engineering Leadership Program to enable students to bridge the gap between traditional engineer- ing education and what they will really experience in industry. With a background in both engineering education and design thinking, her research focuses on how Latina/Latino students develop an identity as an engineer, methods for enhancing student motivation, and methods for involving students in curriculum development and teaching through Peer Designed Instruction.Dr. Ines Basalo, University of Miami Dr. Basalo is an Assistant Professor in Practice in Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering at the Uni- versity of Miami. Prior to joining the University of Miami in 2014, she worked as an adjunct professor at
thinking skills, communication, teamwork, professionalism, andnetworking. Higher-order thinking skills that students addressed include analytical, critical,problem solving skills, and creativity. Communication includes communication skills with peers,research teams, and people from different disciplines of research, presentation of the researchthrough posters, and writing skills. Professionalism includes persistence, patience, confidence,independence or autonomy, and time management.As shown in Figure 5, before starting the programs, 43% of students valued acquiring knowledgebut it dropped tremendously on the post-survey to 20%. However, practice of techniques/skillswas the area students expressed more on the post-survey (60%) than on the pre
for the data analyses andthe write up of research reports for the purpose of continuous curriculum improvement. Rim has a PhD inInstructional Systems/Educational Technology from the Florida State University (FSU). Rim also holds a M.Scdegree in Instructional Systems and a Certificate in Human Performance Technology from FSU, and a B.Sc inInformation Technology from Notre Dame University. Rim’s major project and research interests includetechnology integration in education; assessment and evaluation; learner-centered methods and strategies; and anyother methods that assist in enhancing human performance and learning improvement. Rim has authored and co-authored several published articles in peer-reviewed journals, and conferences
. iv. Midterm business model report is a summary of the business model creation and entrepreneurial activities in a progress report technical writing format. The students will document the progression of their business model and how their initial business model hypotheses were validated or rejected (backward-looking summary). Also, the students will provide a forward-looking summary to provide insights over the next phase of the project. v. Teamwork effectiveness assignments ensure that all team members contribute fairly and effectively in all entrepreneurial activities. The students are required to evaluate their peers four times throughout the semester using the team creation/evaluation software
and minority protégés participating in the LouisStokes Alliance for Minority Participation (LSAMP) program in Science, Technology,Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) across four different universities within a statewideuniversity system, in the United States of America, to learn the following regarding mentoringrelationships for minority STEM students: (1) how students respond to ideas and projects, (2)how students conquer challenges and respond to setbacks, (3) how students set and pursue theiracademic goals, (4) how students describe their undergraduate research mentoring relationshipwith peers and professors, (5) how students maintain their focus in a professional developmentprogram such as LSAMP, (6) how students characterize and describe
? Concepts Question 2: What do you think about the examples Effectiveness of Peer Collaboration and solved in class collectively as group? Engagement Question 3: What is your opinion on the instructor Increased Understanding and Confidence using visual supplements when solving problems? Question 4: What do you think about the rigor of Embracing the Challenge and Valuing this course compared to others? Rigor Question 5: What did this class teach you about Increased Knowledge of Dynamic Nature Engineering? of EngineeringCollectively, the themes that emerged in the study provide insight into students’ experiences withthe approaches and technique implemented by the
encourage them to pursue STEAM careers. One particularly effective approach isthrough hands-on learning and “making,” since children often have a natural affinity fortinkering and learn well through active involvement in meaningful activities [1]. Hands-on,project-based learning has been shown to get more students engaged with STEAM and help themlearn key skills for the future [2]. However, most STEAM education programs target students inupper-middle or high school [3]. Bustamante et. al write, “Since engineering education hastraditionally not been part of the general K–12 education experience (i.e., the beginning ofprimary school (age 5) through the end of secondary school (age 18)), early childhood educatorshave minimal background in engineering
future, research questions 1-4 will be addressed using the weekly studentparticipation logs and actual course performance. The results of this analysis will provideinsights into the transition of study habits of the students over the semester and identify anypossible high-impact course engagement behaviors.LimitationsThe main limitation of this study, and the self-reflection participation logs in general, is thereliance on self-reporting and accurate self-evaluation. It has been shown that self-assessmentand instructor-assessment of in-class participation are often not in agreement [1], [5], [19]. Someauthors have discussed combining self- or peer-assessment scores with instructor-assessmentscores to avoid inflation [2], [19], but this assumes
teacher (or other STEMGROW “EduGuides;” faculty, staff and peer guides) provides briefmentoring responses to their activities, meant to engage students in additional writing andreflection.A 2016-2017 student survey revealed the following top impact areas, based on 473 studentresponses [4], to show growth or positive impact: “More self-motivated” (73%) “More confident to achieve: (68%) “More curious to learn new things” (66%) “Listen better to feedback” (65%) “Encourage and mentor others” (63%)In our EPCC and UTEP incarnation of the EduGuide process, students are tasked to use SMARTtechnology online activities for up to one hour per week outside of the classroom (for which theytypically will receive some course credit
others in a peer-to-peer further along in college, that’s been through interaction and impact of said activities it.” Resources Recommendations and use of college “I’ve recommended the physics tutoring resources including, but not limited to center, the writing center and the math center, campus tutoring labs, transportation, those are the ones I end up pushing people to student services, and more. the most.” Transition to Impacts of changes in expectations, “There’s a lot of changes between high school Adulthood workload, freedom and independence and here; in high school you showed up at 8am
essay: This assignment encouraged students to critically read and analyze literature in the engineering pedagogy field. Students chose one of the module topics described above and were asked to choose at least three readings on this topic out of a list provided by the instructors. The essay prompt required students to challenge the perspectives and assumptions of the readings’ authors in order to develop their own opinions on the topic. 3. Peer observation and reflection: Students observed and were observed teaching by a peer from the class. Observers were asked to provide constructive feedback on strengths and areas for growth, after which the observed student would write a reflection on the process and how
(asphalt) - Technical -Lunch & Learn Activities Programming - High Voltage Lab Communication - International Paper - Bridge Recharge - Study Hall - Flight Research Lab - Practice Industry Tour - City tour - Supplemental -Center for Advanced Presentations - Student Spotlight - Service Training Instruction Vehicular Systems - Closing Ceremony - Group Presentation - Peer mentoring -Excel Workshop - Digital Media Center
” [17]. Furthermore,senior students with a track record of bringing their inventions to international academicpublications shared their journey in a session titled “Journeying New Horizons” [18]. Thesesharing seminars aim to inspire students and provide them with professional insights into thepotential achievements of their upcoming industrial collaborations.Stage 2. Equipping core competencies through training programs and peer learningThe “Equipping” stage commences with the identification of technical prerequisites essentialfor students to qualify for the industrial projects. These core competencies are collaborativelydefined by all stakeholders involved in industrial collaborations. In the 2023/24 period, thecore competencies outlined for
things that I learned the most.” (2022) • “The textbook was very guiding in breaking down the complexity behind sustainability and helped me better understand it.” (2022) • “I enjoyed the questions every week, it forced me to write and formulate thoughts on the applicability of engineering, which no other class really requires.” (2021) • “I think what helped me learn the most was when we discussed questions other than the assigned chapter problems, and/or when the professor gave her own mini-lecture on the topic.” (2021) • “Discussion based class time and listening to other perspectives is very good for learning.” (2021) • “The short lectures, discussions, research, and book
to create such opportunities, Dr. Zastavker’s re- cent work involves questions pertaining to students’ motivational attitudes and their learning journeys in a variety of educational environments. One of the founding faculty at Olin College, Dr. Zastavker has been engaged in development and implementation of project-based experiences in fields ranging from science to engineering and design to social sciences (e.g., Critical Reflective Writing; Teaching and Learning in Undergraduate Science and Engineering, etc.) All of these activities share a common goal of creat- ing curricular and pedagogical structures as well as academic cultures that facilitate students’ interests, motivation, and desire to persist in
?Three distinct phases of a woman’s journey were examined. First, a sample of women who havealready completed an undergraduate engineering degree from a public university was studied.Secondly, women in their upper division year of their undergraduate degree program were askedto reflect on their experiences over their undergraduate career. Both of these groups of womenwere asked questions from the same interview protocol. Finally, classes were observed anddiscourse was analyzed in gatekeeper courses to understand the interaction of women and theirprofessors as well as women with their peers, both male and female. The lens of Feminist PostStructuralism and of Sense-Making allowed the critical analysis to shine a light on theunderlying cultural
, reading andresponding to peers’ posts; (b) the reflectivity component includes writing that requires studentsto structure their thinking and reflect in a formalized manner; and (c) the scaffolding componentincludes directions on materials, structured assignments, quizzes, and instructor feedback.We first developed a set of questions designed to probe each construct, asking students toindicate the strength of their agreement with the statement, using a 5-point Likert scale. We usedCronbach’s scale reliability tests to assess internal consistency for each scale. Seven variableswere combined to form a single scale that measured scaffolding (α = .89), two variables wereASSESSING SIRA FRAMEWORK FOR DEVELOPING ETHICAL REASONINGcombined to form a scale