like engineers.AcknowledgementsSupport for this work is provided by the National Science Foundation under Award No. EEC1664228. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this materialare those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National ScienceFoundation.References[1] National Science Board. (2016). Science and engineering indicators 2016. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation (NSB-2016-1).[2] Tai, R. T., Liu, C. Q., Maltese, A. V., & Fan, X. T. (2006). Planning early for careers in science. Science, 312, 1143-1144.[3] Aschbacher, P. R., Li, E., & Roth, E. J. (2010). Is science me? High school students’ identities, participation, and aspirations in science
, conclusions or recommendations expressed herein arethose of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.We also wish to acknowledge the assistance of the Institutional Research Officers at each campus RAin gathering the data used in this analysis.References [1] X. Chen and M. Soldner, STEM Attrition: College Students’ Paths Into and Out of STEM Fields (Statistical D Analysis Report), ser. National Center for Educational Statistics (NCSE) Statistical Analysis Reports. U.S. Department of Education, 2013. [2] J. Levin and J. H. Wyckof, “Predictors of persistence and success in an engineering program,” NACADA Journal, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 15–21, 1995. [3] J. Middleton, S. Krause
University of Washington in 1994 and a Ph.D. from the University of Washington in 2000.Dr. Gregory Mason, Seattle University Gregory S. Mason was born and raised in Spokane Washington. He received the B.S.M.E. degree from Gonzaga University in 1983, the M.S.M.E. degree in manufacturing automation from Georgia Institute of Technology in 1984 and the Ph.D. degree in mechanical engineering, specializing in multi-rate digital controls, from the University of Washington in 1992. He worked in a robotics lab for the Department of Defense for five years after receiving his M.S.M.E. He is currently an Associate Professor in the De- partment of Mechanical Engineering at Seattle University, Seattle, WA. His research interests are
. Matthews, and D. R. Kelly, “Grit: Perseverance andPassion for Long-Term Goals,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 92, no. 6, pp.1087-1101, 2007.[2] A. L. Duckworth and P. E. Quinn, “Development and Validation of the Short Grit Scale(Grit-S),” Journal of Personality Assessment, vol. 91, no. 2, pp. 166-174, 2009.[3] A. L. Duckworth and D. S. Yeager, “Measurement Matters: Assessing Personal QualitiesOther Than Cognitive Ability for Educational Purposes,” Educational Researcher, vol. 44, no. 4,pp. 237-251, May 2015.[4] A. L. Duckworth, R. E. White, A. J. Matteucci, A. Shearer, and J. J. Gross, “A Stitch inTime: Strategic Self-Control in High School and College Students,” Journal of EducationalPsychology, vol. 108, no. 3, pp. 329-341
85 PC/ABS (Polycarbonate/acrylonitrile butadiene styrene) (Industrial 15-55 plastic) PS (Polystyrene) 15-55Table 2. Data collection table with example Disassembly time Recycle Part Material(s) Mass (lbs.) Recyclable (Y/N) (mins and secs) Fraction Ex. Steel Screw Steel 0.11 Y 11 secs 75-85 Total Mass Total TimeConclusionsWhile this class is still under development, the initial offering was well received by students andwe plan to continue offering the course. An informal survey of
,CV,N) Table 6- Average visits to study materials (S) and assessment resources (A)The hypothesis tests comparing Fully Engaged (FE) and Consistent Viewers (CV) groups’average visits to assessments (A) were as follows:Test 1:Null hypothesis: µA,CV,T = µA,FE,TAlternate hypothesis: µA,CV,T < µA,FE,TTest 2:Null hypothesis: µA,CV,N = µA,FE,NAlternate hypothesis: µA,CV,N < µA,FE,NThese tests yield p-values of 0.001 for Thermoelectricity and 0.036 for Nanobiosensors. Takingthe standard threshold of p=0.05, we reject the null hypothesis in both tests and conclude thatConsistent Viewers group access assessments less frequently as compared to Fully Engagedlearners in both courses. The fact that we can accept both alternate hypotheses
, Mathematics and Science, GEMS: A science outreach program for middle-school female students. Journal Of STEM Education: Innovations & Research, 14(3), 41-47.7. Demetry, C., Hubelbank, J., Blaisdell, S. L., Sontgerath, S., Nicholson, M. E., Rosenthal, E., & Quinn, P. (2009). Supporting Young Women To Enter Engineering: Long-Term Effects Of A Middle School Engineering Outreach Program For Girls. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering J Women Minor Scien Eng, 15(2), 119-142. doi:10.1615/jwomenminorscieneng.v15.i2.208. Safferman, A. G., Jeffers, A. T., & Safferman, S. I. (2004). Understanding K-12 engineering outreach programs. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice
,weareexploringideastoofferanoptionalpeerreviewactivityforthefinalproject.This wouldprovidestudentsinterestedinpeerfeedbackwiththatoption,whileaccommodatingprivacyconcernsofthose wishingtokeeptheirideaslimitedtothemselvesandthefaculty.Table2aI-SeriesAssessmentRubric EachGeneralEducationcategoryisgroundedinasetoflearningoutcomes.ForthefullsetoflearningoutcomesforI-seriescoursessee:www.gened.umd.eduThisrubricisdesignedasatooltoassessactivitiesaimedatstudentgainsinthefollowlearningoutcome(s)fortheI-SeriesGeneralEducationCategory: Atthecompletionofthiscourse,studentswillbeableto
Calculus Females (Actual and Normal) 60 Algebra Males 50 Algebra Females 40 Calculus-Males m = 15.8 s = 4.8 30 Calculus-Females
%), withdisciplines having an average of 26.3% women undergraduates at the schools examined.Table 1: Summary of schools included in analysis. All ASEE data (enrollment, disciplinecategories) from 2016 except for New Mexico Tech (2015) (ASEE 2015, 2016). Reg = Region(C = Central, E = Eastern, NE = Northeastern, S = Southern, SC = South Central, SW =Southwestern, MW = Midwestern, W = Western); No. ASEE Disc Cat = number of disciplinecategories (including “Other Engineering”) listed in the profile; FT = Full-time, PT = Part-time,UG = undergraduate, Fem = Female. No. ASEE Pub/ % FT % PTSchool
, MATH 1348 Analytical Geometry,Year-2 PHYS 2425/2426 Physics I/II, CHEM 1311 Inorganic Chemistry I MATH 1316 Trigonometry, MATH 1348 Analytical Geometry, MATH 3320Year-3 Differential Equations, PHYS 2425 Physics I, CHEM 1311 Inorganic Chemistry I Identify Concept(s) to be Develop Draft Module Identify Bottleneck Covered Each Week including Sample Problems/ Concepts According to Teaching Examples and Solutions (Course Instructor) Schedule
(PCAST). “Transformation and opportunity: The future of the U. S. research enterprise,” Washington, DC: PCAST, 2012.[2] M. W. Ohland, and E. R. Crockett. “Creating a catalog and meta-analysis of freshman programs for engineering students: Part 1: Summer bridge programs,” in Proceedings of the 2002 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition. Montreal, Canada: ASEE, June 16-19, 2002.[3] B. P. An. “The Impact of Dual Enrollment on College Degree Attainment Do Low-SES Students Benefit?” Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 0162373712461933, 2012.[4] A. Gamoran, A. C. Porter, J. Smithson, and P. A. White. “Upgrading high school mathematics instruction
affords us thechance to change our curriculum, making improvements based on teacher and student feedback;we will continue to do so, analyzing forthcoming results to gauge the success of the curriculumin changing student perceptions. The continuation of the project presents further opportunities toimmerse ourselves in student design experiences and uncover features that are influential forchanging student perceptions about engineering.AcknowledgementsThis materials is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under GrantNo. 1513175-DRL.References1. McGrath, E., Sayres, J., Lowes, S., & Lin, P. (2008, October). Underwater lego robotics as the vehicle to engage students in STEM: The build it project's first year of
program, 40% of the population is comprised of women, a stark contrast to thesmall percentage of women represented in more traditional engineering programs. We felt thatinterviewing a proportionally larger number of women in a context different than traditionalengineering programs might provide insight into their construction, understanding, and valuingof knowledge(s). We acknowledge that this might risk having the male student having tokenrepresentation, and a follow-up study and analysis plans to address this gender imbalance.Data Collection: Participants were recruited from the AME capstone course and were chosenbecause the course is only taken by students approaching graduation; we felt that these studentshad ample experience with the program
). at 4. Morozov, E. Making it. The New Yorker (2014). at 5. Foster, T. Welcome to the maker-industrial revolution. Popular Science (2015). at 6. Chachra, D. Why I am not a maker. The Atlantic (2015). at 7. Moldofsky, K. The maker mom. (2015). at 8. Hatch, M. The maker manifesto. McGraw Hill Education (2014). at 9. Martinez, S. & Stager, G. Invent to learn: Making, tinkering, and engineering in the classroom. (Constructing modern knowledge press, 2013).10. Make. Maker Pro. (2014).11. Makerspace North. Makerspace north. (2014). at 12. The British Council. Maker library network. at 13. Chaihuo Maker Space. Shenzhen Maker Faire. (2015). at 14. Seeed. First open hardware gathering in
expressed herein are solely the authors’.REFERENCES CITED 1 Lighthall, A. (2012). Ten things you should know about today’s student veteran. Thought & Action: The NEA Higher Education Journal, 80-89. Available at http://www.nea.org/home/53407.htm2 Lord, S., Kramer, K., Olson, R., Karsada, M., Hayhurst, D., Rajala, S., … & Soldan, D. (2011). Special Session – Attracting and supporting military veterans to engineering programs. Proceedings of the 2011 Frontiers in Education Conference, Rapid City, SD, October.3 U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. (2012). Annual benefits report fiscal year 2012. Available at
. Page 26.556.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2015 DNA Extraction Using Engineering Design: A STEM Integration Unit (Curriculum Exchange) Target Grade Level: 6-8 En gr TEA MSE n gin eerin g t o Tran sform t h e E d ucat ion of An aly sis, Measuremen t , & Scien ce Authors and Contact: Corey A. Mathis Tamara J. Moore S. Selcen Guzey Purdue University Purdue University Purdue University mathisc@purdue.edu
questionnaire.Self-Rating of Engineering Leadership Skills. The second part of the survey included a skillsquestionnaire that was developed based on the survey instrument created by Ahn et al.3. Ahnet al.’s survey contained 45 items specifically designed to measure outcomes in engineeringundergraduate students related to leadership, adaptability to change, and synthesis abilities3.Twenty of these items, principally the ones directly related to leadership, were chosen for theskills questionnaire (e.g. I independently initiate new individual or team projects and Imanage and organize my time efficiently). The participants were asked to rank the extent towhich they embodied each statement on a scale of one to four (1=rarely, 2=sometimes,3=frequently and 4
). Page 26.1430.4 Table 1 – Coding scheme description and examples.Domain Category Description Example Refers to writing or presentation of the design “There are grammatical error[s] Communication work. throughout the paper.” Explicitly refers to one of the design concepts Design Concepts taught in class by using terminology taught in “The goal could [be] more specific.” class.Substance Refers
for the actors to develop their own contextthrough improvisation.In TPC, Open Scene is used differently. Students are paired up (with an occasional trio, ifnecessary) and given a generic set of instructions explaining that they will perform a ‘scene’ withtheir partner(s) for their peers in approximately ten minutes. These instructions also include somereminders of things to consider that may help them communicate their scene, including tone,volume, body language, and use of relational space (all discussed previously in course content).Students are additionally encouraged to use readily available props as they deem appropriate.Each group is instructed to keep their scene a secret from other groups as they prepare. Then,each group is given
from this study can give contextualized voice to student-led efforts in retention [17].References[1] M. S. Ross and S. McGrade, “An exploration into the impacts of the National Society of Black Engineers (NSBE) on student persistence,” in ASEE 123rd Annual Conference & Exposition, 2016.[2] D. Dickerson and T. Zephirin, “Exploring the association of a cultural engineering student organization chapter with student success,” in Proceedings of ASEE 124th Annual Conference & Exposition, 2017.[3] W. C. Lee and H. M. Matusovich, “A model of co-curricular support for undergraduate engineering students,” J. Eng. Educ., vol. 105, no. 3, pp. 406–430, 2016.[4] W. C. Lee, A. Godwin, and A. L. H. Nave
, “Teacher and Student Attitudes Toward Teacher Feedback,” RELC J., vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 38–52, 2007.[4] E. Ekholm, S. Zumbrunn, and S. Conklin, “The relation of college student self-efficacy toward writing and writing self-regulation aptitude: writing feedback perceptions as a mediating variable,” Teach. High. Educ., vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 197–207, 2015.[5] R. Yoshida, “Teachers’ choice and learners’ preference of corrective feedback types,” Lang. Aware., vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 78–93, 2008.[6] O. H. A. Mahfoodh and A. Pandian, “A Qualitative Case Study of EFL Students’ Affective Reactions to and Perceptions of Their Teachers’ Written Feedback,” English Lang. Teach., vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 14–25, 2011.[7] T. Ryan and M
. Guskey, and L. A. Jung, “Response-to-intervention and mastery learning: tracing roots and seekingcommon ground,” The Clearing House, vol. 84, no. 6, pp. 249-255, 2011[3] – M. W. Bonner, “Grading rigor in counselor education: a specifications grading framework,” EducationalResearch Quarterly, vol. 39, no. 4, pp 21-42, 2016[4] – G. G. Shaker, and S. K. Nathan, “Teaching about celebrity and philanthropy: a case study of backward coursedesign,” The Journal of Nonprofit Education and Leadership, vol. 8, nr. 4, pp 403-421, 2018[5] – J. Ring, “Specifications Grading in the Flipped Organic Classroom,” Journal of Chemical Education, vol. 94,no. 12, pp 2005-2006, 2017[6] – L. Pope, H. B. Parker, and S. Ultsch, “Assessment of specifications grading in an
efforts to create inclusive classrooms and programming.Dr. Melissa M. Bilec, University of Pittsburgh Dr. Bilec is an associate professor in the Swanson School of Engineeringˆa C™s Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering. Dr. Bilecˆa C™s research program focuses on the built environment, life cycle assessment, sustainable healthcare, and energy im ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 A Collaborative Virtual Air Quality Learning Experience with Kakenya’s Dream (Resource Exchange, Diversity) The curriculum we developed for this collaborative project focused on introducing thestudents and instructors to the importance of air quality (AQ), its impacts on
InformationPseudonym Racial Gender Disability(s) Engineering Major Year-in-School International Identity Identity Student (Y/N)Susan White Woman Multiple physical disabilities Mechanical Third-year NLucy Black Woman Cognitive, learning Civil Third-year YAria White Woman Cognitive Industrial Ph.D. NClaire White Woman Cognitive, learning, physical Computer Science Fourth-year N Co-researcher Recruitment and Data Collection This
PIECES: AN INFORMAL FRAMEWORK TO ENCOURAGE MULTIFACETED ENGAGEMENT a b c d a. Aerospace Engineering Department. CU Boulder J. Rush Leeker, L. MacDonald, S. Roudbari, L. Ruane, M. Palomar b. Global Engineering, CU Boulder c. Architecture, Sustainable Planning &
Education, 2024 PALAR IN PIECES: AN INFORMAL FRAMEWORK TO ENCOURAGE MULTIFACETED ENGAGEMENT J. Rush Leeker, L. MacDonald, S. Roudbari, L. Ruane, M. Palomar INTRODUCTION PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2 Action Learning (AL): METHODOLOGY Centers on a 'learning by
to help practitioners navigate their careers, help practitioners betterunderstand their students and colleagues, and help administrators/mentors develop an asset-basedand systemic-based understanding of neurodivergence.References[1] H. B. Rosqvist, N. Chown, and A. Stenning, Neurodiversity Studies: A New Critical Paradigm. Taylor & Francis Group, 2020.[2] A. Cuellar, B. Webster, S. Solanki, C. Spence, and M. A. Tsugawa, “Examination of Ableist Educational Systems and Structures that Limit Access to Engineering Education through Narratives,” presented at the 2022 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, American Society for Engineering Education, 2022.[3] T. Sorg, “Where are We, and Where to Next? ‘Neurodiversity’ in
Significance of Scholarship Programs in STEMIntroductionIn this Work-in-Progress paper, we share our ongoing work with an NSF Scholarships in STEM(S-STEM) program related to an iteration of analysis that looked across specific aspects in amore summative manner than our typical analyses during the five years of the project that aremore formative. As the project will soon enter an extension into a sixth year to use existingscholarship funds, we took this opportunity to begin to reflect on overarching goals toward thedevelopment and submission of a new S-STEM proposal to continue this work. The StudentPathways in Engineering and Computing for Transfers (SPECTRA) program in the ClemsonUniversity College of Computing, Engineering
also leverage the MBTI to tailor their teachingmethods to accommodate students' diverse needs, enriching the overall learning experience.Table 1: Myers-Briggs personality types and their descriptive codes. Personality Type Energy Information Decision Lifestyle A Main Trait ISTJ I S T J Inspector ISFJ I S F J Protector INFJ I N F J Counsellor INTJ I N T J Investigator ISTP I S T P Analyzer