. Aaron S. Budge, Ph.D., P.E. Acting Dean College of Science, Engineering and Technology The Engineering Machine Design Contest Minnesota State University, Mankato is an excellent way for universities and colleges to engage with secondary
another. The game-based section of the course was compared with atraditionally instructed section. Students in the game-based section performed better on 14 of 21conceptual questions [3], were more engaged as assessed by the Experience-Sampling Method[13], and made more meaningful connections between core concepts [14]. Using a differentdynamics/control videogame, Spumone, Coller found that students in a game-based section of thecourse scored 0.8 standard deviations higher on concepts covered by the game than students in atraditional section [14], [15].Modified Pong Game for a Control Systems CourseThe famous video game Pong was developed by Atari, Inc. in the early 1970’s [16]. In this 2Dgame, the player volleys a ball from one side of the
psychobiology and political science from Wheaton College in Massachusetts.Dr. Shernita Lee Dr. Shernita Lee is the Assistant Dean and Director of the Graduate School’s Office of Recruitment, Di- versity, and Inclusion at Virginia Tech. She holds a bachelorˆa C™s degree in mathematics from Alabama State University and a doctorate from Virginia TechDr. Nina Parshall, The Ohio State UniversityMs. Alissa Sperling, Drexel UniversityDr. Jacqueline E McDermott, Purdue University Dr. Jackie McDermott joined the College of Engineering at Purdue University in August 2018 and is the Associate Director of Graduate Diversity and Inclusion. Jackie completed her Ph.D. in Molecular and Cellular Biology from Brandeis University and has over
results seen in the unannounced quiz correlate withcontent/performance in final project reports. Systematic assessment of final reports from both theThermo-fluids Lab and the Capstone Project course may provide insight into how and if studentsincorporate concepts of uncertainty into their data analysis and results presented.References [1] Fairbrother, R. and Hackling, M., (1997). Is this the right answer?, International Journal of Science Education vol 18, No. 8, pp. 887-894. [2] Kirkup L, Johnson S, Hazel E, Cheary R W, Green D C, Swift P and Holliday W, (1998). Designing a new physics laboratory programme for first year engineering students, Physics Education vol 33, pp 258-265. [3] Allie, S., Buffler, A., Campbell, B., Lubben, F
psychologyas a framework to understand working adults perceptions of transitioning into retirement. Theframework was not originally intended for usage on students. Several dissertation studies ineducation research have used this framework (Lazarowicz, T., 2015; Powers, M., 2010; Pendleton,K., 2007). Lazarowicz (2015) used Schlossberg’s framework to understand the perceptions ofcommunity college transfer students transition experience to a 4-year university. Powers (2010)incorporated aspects of the three phases of Schlossberg’s Theory to study nontraditional maledropout students. Pendleton (2009) studied welfare recipients attending postsecondary institutionsby framing the study around Schlossberg’s 4 S Model of the Moving Through phase of theframework
. Cady and G. Pearson, “Building educator capacity in K-12 engineering education,” in 2020 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference, American Society for Engineering Education, Jun. 2020.[2] S. S. Guzey, T. J. Moore, and M. Harwell, “Building up STEM: An analysis of teacher- developed engineering design-based STEM integration curricular materials,” Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), vol 6, no. 1, p. 2, 2016, https://doi.org/10.7771/2157-9288.1129.[3] M. A. Bakah, K. A. Nihuka, and A. G. Anto, “Fostering the sustainability and scalability of curriculum innovations through collaborative design,” In Collaborative curriculum design for sustainable innovation and teacher learning, pp
content. Students value that these authentic experienceshelp to answer “overarching scientific question[s] for most of the labs and we weredoing the lab for a purpose.” Course evaluations for Cellular Engineering report a4.83/5 overall evaluation score, with a 5/5 score for intellectually stimulatingcontent. Likewise, Molecular Engineering course evaluations report a 4.00/5overall evaluation score, with a 4.53/5 score for intellectually stimulating content.Additional questions on integrating these new gateway courses with advancedtopics and electives are pending, along with long-term success of the new courseson student engagement in primary research at Duke University, industryconnections and career success.Introduction Linsenmeier and
diversity.4 The program consists of five classes,unique to the minor, that span across two academic years (4 semesters) and relies on the use ofcohort-based program structure, near-peer mentoring, and project-driven learning. The cohortstructure allows for close relationships to form, combatting the social isolation that historicallymarginalized students may feel in CS classes. Peer mentoring benefits students by offeringfurther academic, social, and professional development support within the program. Project-based learning provides strong ties to students’ major area(s) of study (primarily biology andbiochemistry) and supports students’ future success in fields that are becoming increasingly data-driven.1 Finally, the minor program courses focus
Science Foundation grant efforts includ- ing S-STEM, REU, and Includes Alliance grant efforts.Dr. Jennifer Ocif Love, Northeastern University Jennifer Love is a full-time faculty member of Northeastern University’s College of Engineering, most recently in the First Year Engineering program. She is currently the Associate Director for the Center for STEM Education. She has a Bachelor of Science in Mechanical Engineering from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (1993), a Master of Science in Biomedical Engineering from The University of Iowa (1997) and a Doctorate in Education from Northeastern University (2022) where she recently completed her dissertation in elementary STEAM education. She also worked as a professional
duration of the ten-week program. REFERENCES[1] L. Hong, and S. E. Page, "Groups of diverse problem solvers can outperform groups of high-ability problem solvers," Economic Sciences, vol. 101, no. 46, pp. 16385-16389.[2] A. Bandura, "Self-efficacy," in Encyclopedia of human behavior, vol. 4, V. S. Ramachaudran Ed. New York: Academic Press, 1994, pp. 71-81.[3] A. Bandura, "Self-efficacy: Toward a unifiying theory of behavioral change," Psychological Review vol. 84, no. 2, pp. 191-215, 1977.[4] A. Bandura, "Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales," Self-Efficacy Beliefs of Adolescents, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 307-337, 2006.[5] R. Scherer and F. Siddiq, "Revisiting teachers
-visual applications.References[1] M. C. Linn and A. C. Petersen, “Emergence and Characterization of Sex Differences in Spatial Ability: A Meta-Analysis,” Child Dev., vol. 56, no. 6, pp. 1479–1498, 1985, doi: 10.2307/1130467.[2] D. F. Lohman, “Spatial Ability and G.” 1993.[3] J. Buckley, N. Seery, and D. Canty, “Investigating the use of spatial reasoning strategies in geometric problem solving,” Int. J. Technol. Des. Educ., vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 341–362, Mar. 2019, doi: 10.1007/s10798-018-9446-3.[4] N. S. Newcombe, “Picture This: Increasing Math and Science Learning by Improving Spatial Thinking,” Am. Educ., vol. 34, no. 2, p. 29, 2010.[5] H. B. Yilmaz, “On the Development and Measurement of Spatial Ability,” Int. Electron. J
, no. 2, pp. 189–214, Apr. 2020, doi: 10.1007/s10956-019-09794-8.[5] D. Weintrop et al., “Defining computational thinking for mathematics and science classrooms,” J Sci Educ Technol, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 127–147, Feb. 2016, doi: 10.1007/s10956-015-9581-5.[6] M. L. Martínez, O. Lévêque, I. Benítez, C. Hardebolle, and J. D. Zufferey, “Assessing Computational Thinking: Development and Validation of the Algorithmic Thinking Test for Adults,” Journal of Educational Computing Research, vol. 60, no. 6, pp. 1436–1463, Oct. 2022, doi: 10.1177/07356331211057819.[7] M. C. Linn, H.-S. Lee, R. Tinker, F. Husic, and J. L. Chiu, “Teaching and Assessing Knowledge Integration in Science,” Science, vol. 313, no. 5790, pp. 1049–1050, 2006
of inferior educationalopportunities through organizing and activism in the U.S. Southwest primarily [1-3], educationaloppression and school failure for Latinos/as/xs has been marked by institutional processes thathave led to detrimental outcomes – particularly deficit thinking [4-6]. Even though deficitthinking has not been widely explored in engineering education research, there is a growing pushfor asset-based perspectives [7-9].Despite the resistance of the Mexican and Mexican American communitie in the U.S. Southwest(one of the areas with the largest proportion of Latino/a/s students) against unfavorable policiesthat have negatively impacted their educational attainment, the borderlands continue to have “thelongest and most pronounced
, International Journal of Science Education, 41:2, 248-279, DOI: 10.1080/09500693.2018.1548788[7] Streiling, S., Hörsch, C., & Rieß, W. (2021). Effects of Teacher Training in Systems Thinking on Biology Students—An Intervention Study. Sustainability, 13(14), 7631. MDPI AG. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su13147631[8] Smith, S. (2020). Obstacles to and progress toward the vision of the NGSS. Horizon Research, Inc.[9] Coppola, P. (2019) Preparing preservice elementary teachers to teach engineering: Impact on self‐efficacy and outcome expectancy. School Science and Mathematics;.119: 161– 170. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12327[10] Webb, D, LoFaro, K. (2020). Sources of engineering teaching self‐efficacy in a STEAM methods
connecting students, faculty, and staff with NGOˆa C™s around the world for technical projects as part of immersions, teaching, and scholarly activity. She also is thDr. Amy Anderson Amy Anderson is the Associate Provost for Global and Intercultural Affairs and Executive Director of the Center for International Programs (CIP) at the University of Dayton. The CIP provides coordination, strategic planning and administrative support forElizabeth GenerasMrs. Marjorie Langston LangstonSharath Krishna ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2023 Towards an Understanding of the Impact of Community Engaged Learning Projects on Enhancing Teachers’ Understanding of Engineering and Intercultural
, Virtual Online, 2020.[3] E. Davishahl, R. Pearce, T. R. Haskell and K. J. Clarks, "Statics Modeling Kit: Hands-On Learning in the Flipped Classroom," in 2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Salt Lake City, UT, 2018.[4] E. Davishahl, T. Haskell and L. Singleton, "Feel the Force! An Inquiry-Based Approach to Teaching Free-body Diagrams for Rigid Body Analysis," in 127th ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Virtual Online, 2020.[5] E. Davishahl, L. Singleton, T. Haskell and L. G. O'Bannon, "Hands on STEM Learning at Home with 3D-Printed Manipulatives," in 2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access, Virtual Conference, 2021.[6] R. Gorska and S. Sorby, "Testing Instruments for the Assessment of 3-D Spatial Skills
Stokes Alliance Impact Report 1992-2015 (2012 and 2015) [2] Vernon, Julieanne., and Brathwaite, Claude., “Authentic International Research Experience: Program Model in Cartagena, Colombia” in the Proceedings of the 2016 ASEE Annual Conference, Paper ID # 15025, New Orleans, June, 2016. [3] Vernon, Julieanne., and Brathwaite, Claude., “GlobalCUNY: The NYC Louis Stokes Alliance Model for International Re- search Experiences for Minority Students” in the Proceedings of the 2019 ASEE Annual Conference, Paper ID 26211, Tampa, June, 2019. [4] Boyd-Williams, A,. Bigsby, S., Gloster, C., Sowells-Boone, E., Melton, M., Preparing Future Minority Faculty for the Professoriate (Experience)” in the Proceedings of the 2019 ASEE Annual
(accessed Feb. 28, 2023).[2] “Citation report - 728 - Web of Science Core Collection.” https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/citation-report/8c75c603-7be4-4c44-a972- 0c3425970bd1-72586299 (accessed Feb. 28, 2023).[3] M. E. Thompson, “Grade Expectations: The Role of First-Year Grades in Predicting the Pursuit of STEM Majors for First- and Continuing-Generation Students,” J. High. Educ., vol. 92, no. 6, pp. 961– 985, Sep. 2021, doi: 10.1080/00221546.2021.1907169.[4] J. Bastiaan and R. Bastiaan, “Increasing the Interest of Elementary School Girls in STEM Fields Through Outreach Activities,” in 2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings, Tampa, Florida, Jun. 2019, p. 32961. doi: 10.18260/1-2--32961.[5] D. P. Holland, S
a better understanding of the subject and the ability to use and apply it [11].A Survey conducted by Poçan, S., Altay, B. & Yaşaroğlu, C [1] showed the effects of using appson the success and motivation of 73 students in a high school algebra class. The findingsrevealed that mobile technology applications positively impact the learning process. Fabian,Topping, and Barron [2] explored the effects of mobile technology on the attitudes andachievements of 52 elementary school students. They found that mobile technology results inpositive student responses, improving their performance. Yussop, Annamalai, and Salam [3]investigated to find out the effectiveness of a particular mobile application. They found that byusing the app, students
comparison to nationalenrollment data for civil engineering. It was not the intent of this study to further investigateadditional demographic influences.The authors are interested in pursuing additional research questions by using the same data setsupplemented with additional years. In particular an additional study looking at the availableelectronic copies of student essays using keyword search software would assist in understandingspecific reasoning behind student motivations.The views expressed in this work are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect theofficial policy or position of the United States Military Academy, Department of the Army, DoD,or U.S. Government.References[1] Zahorian, S., Elmore, M., and Temkin, K. J., Factors
Jared Markunas who assisted in the development of the survey that will inform the engagementguide prototype.References[1] D. R. Fisher, A. Bagiati, and S. Sarma, “Developing Professional Skills in Undergraduate Engineering Students Through Cocurricular Involvement,” J. Stud. Aff. Res. Pract., vol. 54, no. 3, pp. 286–302, Jul. 2017, doi: 10.1080/19496591.2017.1289097.[2] G. Young, D. B. Knight, and D. R. Simmons, “Co-curricular experiences link to nontechnical skill development for African-American engineers: Communication, teamwork, professionalism, lifelong learning, and reflective behavior skills,” in 2014 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) Proceedings, Madrid, Spain, Oct. 2014, pp. 1–7. doi: 10.1109/FIE
-9304- 92. K. S. McClain and A. Perry (2017) "Where Did They Go: Retention Rates for Students of Color at Predominantly White Institutions," College Student Affairs Leadership: Vol. 4: Iss. 1, Article 3.3. F. A. Freitas & L. J. Leonard (2011). “Maslow's hierarchy of needs and student academic success.” Teaching and Learning in Nursing, 6(1), 9–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.teln.2010.07.0044. T. L. Strayhorn (2019). College students' sense of belonging: A key to educational success for all students. Routledge, an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, pg. 4.5. S. Al-Qudah, J. Davishahl, E. Davishahl & M. Greiner (n.d.). “Investigation of sense of belonging to engineering in undergraduate
; Frost, G. S. (2012, June), "Gamifying"a Library Orientation Tutorial for Improved Motivation and Learning, Paper presented at 2012 ASEEAnnual Conference & Exposition, San Antonio, Texas.[11] Gulotta, J. A., & Parisi, N. S., & Bodnar, C. A. (2016, June), Leveling Up by Gamifying FreshmanEngineering Clinic, Paper presented at 2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, New Orleans,Louisiana.[12] Dyrud, M. (2006, June), Industrial Ethics Training: A Look At Ethics Games, Paper presented at2006 Annual Conference & Exposition, Chicago, Illinois.[13] Streiner, S. D., & Burkey, D. D., & Young, M. F., & Pascal, J., & Cimino, R. T., & Bassett, L.(2021, August), Workshop: Gamifying Engineering Education - A Playful
. Wiebe, “Intuition in insight and noninsight problem solving,” Memory & Cognition, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 238–246, May 1987.[6] D. H. Jonassen, “Toward a design theory of problem solving,” Educational Technology Research and Development, vol. 48, no. 4, pp. 63–85, 2000.[7] S. E. Dreyfus, “Five-stage model of adult skill acquisition,” Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 177–181, 2004.[8] M. T. H. Chi, R. Glaser, and M. J. Farr, The nature of expertise, 1st ed. 1988.[9] E. E. Miskioglu et al., "Situating Intuition in Engineering Practice," Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 112, no. 2, pp. 418-444, 2023, doi: 10.1002/jee.20521.[10] K. A. Ericsson, N. Charness, P. J
Learning Methods: Definitions, Comparisons, and Research Bases," Journal of College Teaching, vol. 36, no. 5, pp. 14-20, 2007.[5] T. Ruutman and H. Kipper, "Teaching Strategies for Direct and Indirect Instruciton in Teaching Engineering," in Proceedings of 14th International Conference on Interactive Collaborative Learning, Slovakia, 2011.[6] A. Poulsen, K. Lam, S. Cisneros and T. Treust, "ARCS Model of Mtivational Design," November 2008. [Online]. [Accessed December 2014].[7] S. Bjorklund, J. Parente and D. Sathianathan, "Effects of Faculty Interaction and Feedback on Gains in Student Skills," Journal of Engieering Education, vol. 93, no. 2, pp. 153-160, 2004.[8] P. Hsieh, J. R. Sullivan and N. S. Guerra, "A Closer
included or removedfrom the user interface of the application.2. What were some of the challenges of working with students 1 and 2 at LandivarUniversity?● Student 1 at Villanva University: The major challenges of working with student 1 at LandivarUniversity mostly stemmed from communication. It took some time finding our footing, learningstudent 1’s strengths, and knowing when to delegate work. There was a learning curve incommunicating effectively what I wanted and needed student 1 to do without seeing him inperson. This meant having multiple Zoom meetings with him 1-on-1 to discuss exactly what theidea was and show him how to implement it. It was also difficult working with student 1 atLandivar University since sometimes his Wi-Fi would not work
Journal of Physics, 72(1), 98-115. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.1614813Finkelstein, N. D., Adams, W. K., Keller, C. J., Kohl, P. B., Perkins, K. K., Podolefsky, N. S., & S, R. (2005). When learning about the real world is better done virtually: A study of substituting computer simulations for laboratory equipment. Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research.Haryadi, R., & Pujiastuti, H. (2020). PhET simulation software-based learning to improve science process skills. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 1521, No. 2, p. 022017). IOP Publishing.Karplus, R. & Butts, D. P. (1977). Science teaching and the development of reasoning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 14
Kentucky.References[1] S. Fayer, A. Lacey, and A. Watson, “STEM Occupations: Past, Present, And Future.” Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2017. [Online]. Available: https://www.bls.gov/spotlight/2017/science- technology-engineering-and-mathematics-stem-occupations-past-present-and- future/pdf/science-technology-engineering-and-mathematics-stem-occupations-past-present- and-future.pdf[2] “Fall 2010 through Fall 2019, Completions Component,” U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), 2020. https://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/use-the-data[3] “2012-17 Beginning Postsecondary Students Longitudinal Study,” National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Oct. 31, 2019
students to demonstrate their learning via this activity.AcknowledgementsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation underIUSE/PFE:RED Grant No. 1920761. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions orrecommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarilyreflect the views of the National Science Foundation.Editorial review by Raha Esmaili Zaghi, Alexander Grey, Peggy Trygstad (Horizon Research,Inc.) is much appreciated.References[1] https://ovpr.uconn.edu/services/rics/irb/researcher-guide/does-evaluation-require-irb-review/#[2] Motaref, S., “The Evaluation of Different Learning Tools in Flipped Mechanics ofMaterials”, 2020 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Virtual Conference
Paper ID #38223Connecting Research to the Broader Community: Developingand Implementing a Graduate Course Across an EngineeringResearch Center’s Partner UniversitiesJean S Larson (Education Director) Jean S. Larson, Ph.D., is the Educational Director for the NSF-funded Engineering Research Center for Bio-mediated and Bio-inspired Geotechnics (CBBG), and Associate Research Professor in both the School of Sustainable Engineering and the Built Environment and the Division of Educational Leadership and Innovation at Arizona State University. She has a Ph.D. in Educational Technology, postgraduate training in Computer