strengths might be a viable option to foster an increase instudent engineering identity.AcknowledgmentsThis study was funded by the National Science Foundation Award # 1744006. The authors aregrateful to the help provided by the following research students at Angelo State University: JesseLee, Maria Ochoa, Austin Poole, Nicholas Manrique and Timmons (TJ) Spies.References[1] M. Cooley (1989). "Human-centered Systems." Designing Human-centred Technology, 133–143. Springer.[2] M. Garbuio, & M. Dressel (2019). 6 Building Blocks of Successful Innovation: HowEntrepreneurial Leaders Design Innovative Futures. Routledge.[3] P. Polak (2008). Out of Poverty: What Works When Traditional Methods Fail. Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.[4] B. Amadei (2014
an intersectional lens, we gain deeper insight into engineering studentpopulations that may reveal potential opportunities and barriers to educational resources and experiencesthat are an important part of preparation for an engineering career.Background and Motivation Promoting social mobility is an emerging outcome of interest for higher education – both in thepopular media and from ranking such as U.S. News, which in 2018 added social mobility measures to itsBest Colleges and Universities methodology (https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities/social-mobility). CollegeNET also introduced a Social Mobility Index for colleges in 2019(https://www.socialmobilityindex.org/). In order to promote social mobility
. Futures and fractures in higher education. New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2019.[32] S. Jaschik, “Grade Inflation, Higher and Higher,” Inside Higher Ed, March 29, 2016. Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2016/03/29/survey-finds-grade- inflation-continues-rise-four-year-colleges-not-community-college[33] C. Smith, “The Influence of hierarchy and layout geometry in the design of learning spaces.” Journal of Learning Spaces, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 59-67, 2017.[34] D. Riley, “Mindsets in Engineering,” in Engineering and Social Justice. Synthesis Lectures
challenges. This constructivist framework provides PSTs andUESs a collaborative space in which to co-construct innovative engineering challenges forupper-elementary students. Specifically, this paper focuses on Ed+gineering’s implementation intwo education courses and two engineering courses during Spring 2019: Collaboration 1, duringPSTs’ and UESs’ first courses in education and engineering, respectively, and Collaboration 2,during an elementary science methods course and a fluid mechanics course near the end ofeducation and engineering students’ respective programs.Research Questions 1. How did PSTs’ Ed+gineering experiences influence their engineering and science knowledge? 2. How did PSTs’ and UESs’ Ed+gineering experiences influence
Energy Engineering EducationAbstractThe Question Formulation Technique (QFT), a powerful yet simple teaching strategy recentlyfeatured in an ASEE online webinar, teaches students how to formulate, work with, improve, anduse their own questions. As a result, students become more confident researchers and bettervalue the role of question formulation in the learning process [1]. While the QFT has beenwidely used in other educational settings, its adoption in higher education has recently beenaccelerated in-part because of a National Science Foundation research study. In this work wedemonstrate two unique, innovative ways to integrate the QFT as a teaching strategy forrenewable energy engineering students. First, we will make visible how the QFT was