ask the studentsto reflect on their own experiences on the engineering teams and teams in other classes. We alsoask students to assess and rank at various stages of the training program: What they think of their individual communication skills overall, which we define as the ability to write, speak and present. What’s most important for their team to succeed on the project: overall communication skills, overall engineering capabilities, or the ability to meet deadlines. What’s most important to them as a team member: succeeding, having open communication, or getting along with their team members. What role they expect of their team leader and fellow members.The student responses allow us to assess the
cut a very high fidelity model and is now working on writing instructions based on what has been learned from this effort.In all cases, the use of the makerspace is free of charge for students. Nine respondents (7 ED and2 ETDC) reported that their makerspaces are open to the community at large, for exploration andentrepreneurship projects, with the majority of schools offering this community access free ofcharge. One ED shared that although the makerspace is not open to members of the community,many of the undergraduate and graduate engineering projects hosted in the space are designed toprovide value to the local community. Though the makerspaces, as reported by ED and ETDC,ranged in size (from basement studios and small labs to 60,000
a search using the terms “culturally 1responsive” in peer-reviewed qualitative methodology journals such as Qualitative Inquiry andInternational Journal of Qualitative Methods. If a validation strategy related to culturalresponsiveness appeared in two or more articles, we discussed its application to Walther et al.’sframework and to engineering educational research in general. We then included it in our review.However, this review is not intended to be an exhaustive search or comprehensive systematicreview on validation strategies, and thus there may have been validation strategies that wemissed due to our limited search methods
their hands feel when they touch hot vs. cold items (such as stainless steel pot). Have students draw or write about how their hands feel when in contact with a hot surface vs. in contact with a cold surface. Discuss with students how the heat from a hot surface is transferred to their hands when their hands are in contact with such surface. Explain how some materials let heat through more easily than others. These are called good ‘conductors’ of heat. The heat travels or ‘conducts’ through the material. The glass should have felt the hottest because it is the best conductor of heat. Insulation materials, such as polystyrene felt the coolest, because it is a poor conductor of heat.Convection
in Science" camps (survey respondents ranged from 8 to 32 per camp with median = 21); • 9 "Solar System Adventures" camps (survey respondents ranged from 13 to 25 per camp with median=19); • 7 "Engineering" camps (survey respondents ranged from 12 to 25 per camp with median =23); Page 26.9.7 • 1 "Robotics" camp (survey respondents were 15 girls); and • 7 "Rocketry" camps (survey respondents ranged from 9 to 28 per camp with median =21). NASA Theme Activities Students Identified As Their "Favorite”Camp Name Number writing a description Number of different Most popular
students with deadlines allowing for development ofstudent project and time management skills. Peer and self evaluations were due at the end of thesemester providing students with the opportunity to assess how they perceived each groupmember performed throughout the course. Group evaluations focused on teamwork and groupcommunication during the semester.Project updates were given by student teams bimonthly, totaling six updates, throughout thesemester allowing students the opportunity to develop their oral skills. Project updates were fiveminute presentations covering the team’s progress and the next tasks the teams would addressregarding the proposed upgrades to the WWTP. Project updates were given to faculty membersin a conference room setting
DiscussionSignificant differences were found in male and female engineering students’ indicated out-of-school interests or experiences during grades 9-12 of high school (Table 2). More male studentsreported tinkering with mechanical or electrical devices, reading or watching science fiction,playing computer/video games, and writing computer programs or designing web pages. Morefemale students reported interacting with the natural world and participating in sciencegroups/clubs/camps. There were no significant differences by gender in engaging withchemistry, taking care of animals, participating in science/math competitions, reading orwatching non-fiction science, and talking with friends or family about science. Many math andscience competitions or programs
involve small system design, signal processing, and intelligent instrumentation.Dr. Ying Yu, University of Hartford Dr. Ying Yu received her B.Eng. from Fudan University, Shanghai, China, in 2000. She received her M.S. and Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering from Brown University, R.I., USA, in 2003 and 2007, respec- tively. Currently, she is teaching as an associate professor of the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering at the University of Hartford. Her current research interests are audio and speech signal processing, acoustic scene classification, speaker identification and verification, promoting diversity and inclusion in the academic environment, and teaching with new educational methods, including peer
guest instructors duringlunch. As a culminating end-of-camp activity, students worked in teams to design solutions tocurrent problems in global health and presented their projects to peers and guests.Students provided both quantitative and qualitative assessment of the camp through pre- andpost-camp surveys. Student assessment data indicate that the camp was effective in increasingstudents’ self-assessed knowledge about science and engineering and the bioengineering field,and the camp increased the participants’ desire to attend college at the host institution in thefuture. Students enjoyed the team project of designing a solution to a problem in global health.As student assessment indicates that the camp was an enjoyable and effective
short profiles ofeach participant to elevate their unique stories and identities; the profiles were approved by theparticipants. Each chose a pseudonym for the study and some details about them are excludedintentionally to protect their privacy.Student ProfilesEsperanzaEsperanza was a sophomore student in the winter of 2022. She identifies as Christian, cis-gendered,female, heterosexual, and as multiracial and Hispanic but does not speak Spanish. Esperanza wasdiagnosed with a physical disability that causes nerve pain that impacts her hands and feet, whichaffects her ability to walk, write, and do lab work and results in physical exhaustion that requires her torest to recuperate. She also is affected by asthma and anxiety. She chose not to
promote the application of theoretical concepts.4. To provide students with the ability to find solutions to the problems and to enhance theircritical reasoning needed to choose the appropriate solution in accordance with specific criteria.5. To enhance other competencies within the engineering, such as: the ability to write goodtechnical reports and to make presentations, project management and economics, and team-work.Having defined the course objectives, goals and outcomes, based on the available educationalresources and support, the instructor have to select the most suitable methods to obtain thesegoals and outcomes. PjBL and PBL methods were chosen because it prompts the students toencounter the core concepts and principles, while managing
mechanics researcher in Paris, France before returning to MIT as Assistant Director of Admissions. Currently Dr. Wendell works as a Senior Lecturer in MIT’s Department of Mechanical Engineering teaching design, manufacturing, and instrumentation.Dr. Andrea S. Walsh, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Andrea Walsh is a historical sociologist who specializes in the fields of women’s and gender studies, rhetoric and communication and visual media. She teaches at Massachusetts Institute of Technology in the programs in Women’s and Gender Studies and Writing and Comparative Media Studies. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2017 Getting to Gender Parity in a Top-Tier
in academia and research, broaden my knowledge base, engage in evidence-based practices to promote the quality of life, and ultimately be an avid contributor to the world of academia through research, peer reviews, and publications. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019 Negotiating Identity as a Response to Shame: A Study of Shame within an Experience as a Woman in EngineeringAbstract: This research paper presents the findings of an interpretative phenomenologicalanalysis (IPA) case study of the experience of shame in a woman engineering student. Ouroverarching research question that framed this study was: How do woman students with multiplesalient identities
ability to external sources. The mastery goal isvery fluid, as it can change from task to task.23 Research has suggested that adolescent femalesexhibit higher mastery goals, while males typically exhibit higher performance goals.22,23 This canbe detrimental for males if their focus shifts too heavily toward maintaining their public imagerather than learning the material.22 Females focus more heavily on mastery of the material toincrease their self-efficacy perception over time.22,24 However, females are also inherently exposedto a “stereotype threat”. Stereotype threats are the feeling of judgement by peers based on societalstereotypes.16,25 This phenomena causes students to fear doing poorly for the fact that they feelthey may be thereafter
these challenges highlight the need to better preparetoday’s engineers with the intuition, skills and tools they need to tackle these problems. CharlesVest, 9 former president of National Academy of Engineering, asserts that engineering studentsprepared for professional careers in the year 2020 and beyond, “must be excited by their freshman year; must have an understanding of what engineers actually do; must write and communicate well; must appreciate and draw on the richness of American diversity; must think clearly about ethics and social responsibility; must be adept at product development and high-quality manufacturing; must know how to merge the physical, life, and information sciences when working at
anddiscuss. To aid this description, Q-set 1 “reasons for participating in out-of-class activities” isused as an example. First, participants were asked to recall the reasons that they participate inout-of-class activities and write the reasons on a blank paper. This step allowed the participantsto recall their decision-making processes freely. Second, participants read the Q-set and, if any oftheir reasons were not on the cards, use one blank card per missing reason to record each missingreason. These new reasons formed the basis of new items. Third, participants sorted Q-set 1 into three groups: ‘yes’ (this is a reason that I participate in out-of-class activities), ‘maybe’ (this may be a reason that I participate) and ‘no’ (this is not a
, make crude comments, like, “You’re not actually smart,you’re just getting good grades because you’re a girl.”Responses: a. Just blow it off. I know what I’ve done b. Say “Listen, you don’t know me. I worked just as hard as you did, and I earned my grade. I don’t appreciate those comments.” c. Email the guy and in writing ask him to stop. d. Talk to the professor or someone else in charge and ask for their help in stopping Page 26.1434.4 the comments.Scenario 2: Sexual jokeWe asked respondents to respond to Scenario 2 as either the student or as the student’s
students are required to select aproject, identify a sponsor, write a draft proposal, do an oral presentation on their project,conduct a literature review, maintain a project notebook and submit a final written proposal atthe end of the semester. In the spring semester students must provide an update the first week ofclasses after the winter break along with an interim evaluation from the sponsor. Also, during thespring semester students are required to give updates on the projects during class, write a finalpaper and to participate in UNH-M’s Undergraduate Research Conference with a twenty-minutetalk and a poster presentation on their projects.The ET program has had long-standing relationships with many industrial partners, including theone
College of Engineering Pune (COEP) as the founder head of the innovation Center. Dr Waychal earned his Ph D in the area of developing Innovation Competencies in Information System Organizations from IIT Bombay and M Tech in Control Engineering from IIT Delhi. He has presented keynote / invited talks in many high prole international conferences and has published papers in peer- reviewed journals. He / his teams have won awards in Engineering Education, Innovation, Six Sigma, and Knowledge Management at international events. His current research interests are engineering edu- cation, software engineering, and developing innovative entrepreneurs and intrapreneurs. He was chosen as one of the five outstanding
-term goals in their professional career. This tool has been adapted for use in the educationalsetting in a faculty mentoring capacity. The ET program advisors assign the freshman or transferS-STEM student scholars with faculty mentors to match their area of research interest. Thefaculty mentors meet with the students a minimum of three to four times a year to review theirIDP, make suggestions, and provide input for reaching their goals. The goals of the IDP processare to; develop a deeper more meaningful relationship between advisor and student, reflect anddevelop a strategy for the scholar’s educational and career, and manage expectations and identifyopportunities. In the initial meeting there are several prompts for the student to write
variety of sustainability assessments, ranging from indirect todirect measures of student learning, are available but a comprehensive review of the field isneeded to make the assessments more accessible and implementable by educators from acrossengineering disciplines.A systematic review of ASEE conference proceedings was conducted to identify and discuss thequality of available methods for assessing student knowledge of and interest in sustainability.First, a search of the ASEE PEER database for the terms “sustainability + assessment” yielded1001 results. Records with relevance indexes above 1.0 were screened based on their abstractsand appraised by their full texts according to four inclusion criteria: (1) The study was publishedduring 2011 to
explanations, opinion, judgment, etc Ind Individual thinking/problem solving. CG Discuss clicker question in groups of 2 or more students WG Working in groups on worksheet activity OG Other assigned group activity, such as responding to instructor question Prd Making a prediction about the outcome of demo or experiment SP Presentation by student(s) TQ Test or quiz W Waiting O Other – explain in comments Instructor is Doing Lec Lecturing RtW Real-time writing on board, doc. projector, etc. Fup Follow-up/feedback on clicker question or activity to entire class PQ Posing non-clicker question to students (non-rhetorical) CQ Asking a clicker question AnQ
evident world problems, indicated but not well evident but do and align with alignment with program articulated, do not align with program not align with program program Writing ability Poor writing Fair writing Good writing Excellent writing skills skills skills skills Clear evidence of Not Vague details; Indicated with Indicated with applicant’s
AbstractIn this research paper, we explore student responses to Utility Value Interventions in staticscourses. Introductory engineering mechanics courses (e.g., statics, dynamics) are critical pointswithin a curriculum, and student performance in these courses can have a strong influence onfuture success. And while these courses are often thought of as “weed out” courses, the ubiquityof these courses for engineers is what makes them an important place for students to develop themotivation to persist through their engineering education. One particularly promising tool for thisdevelopment has been Utility Value Interventions (UVIs) in which students are given opportunitiesto reflect on how their coursework aligns with their lives through short writing
pressure vessel by applying the thin-walled structure theory.In addition to enduring outcomes (Table 2), the labs will educate students on the “important toknow” topics (Table 3). These are specific (i.e., more detailed) topics that students learn whenthey participate in the lab and write a lab reports afterwards.In addition, students confirm lab results with the theoretical results as a part of lab report writeup so that students will be able to understand the theories behind the lab activities and also tounderstand potential errors associated to each activity during the lab.In addition to the contents of Table 3 for specific topics, students must become proficient withthe equipment usage to conduct hands-on experiments all labs. Also
. With which college/school are you affiliated? C. What program are you attending? D. How did you find out about the international program? (Check all that apply.) General Questions for All SA programs As a result of participating in this international program: 1. My confidence and ability to live abroad or interact with people from other cultures has been strengthened. 2. I have a greater appreciation for other nations or cultures. 3. I have a deeper understanding of my own culture. 4. I have a deeper understanding of my own discipline. 5. My respect and love for people different from me has grown. 6. Please write a paragraph explaining the impact that your study abroad program has had on your overall
. Many of the quicker students had to wait for their peers to finish writing theirnotes. This issue will be addressed in the survey data section of the paper. Getting back to thevideo lectures posted after the class. At times, when the content was not covered sufficientlybecause of the slower in-class lecture techniques, a video lecture was recorded with redundantlecture content after the class – usually posted within a day of the lecture. The video lecturematerial is summarized in Table 1. Table 1: Video Lecture Topics Lecture Lecture Topic Covered Topic Covered Number Number Passive Sign
educators have sought to increase student motivation and success is through theuse of Utility Value Interventions (UVIs) (Hecht et al., 2020; Hulleman, Kosovich, Barron, &Daniel, 2017). UVIs typically take the form of short writing assignments that prompt students tothink about course content and the relationship that content might have to their own lives orgoals. UVIs have been used in STEM education as well as other disciplines to increasemotivation and a growing body of research has demonstrated positive student outcomes. Forexample, Hulleman et al. (2017) used UVIs in an introductory psychology course anddemonstrated their positive impact on interest, expectancy for success, and subsequentperformance. Relatedly, Kosovich, Hulleman, Phelps
orally between students as well as with the instructor.The use of music in lectures was easy to do in overcoming the ambient silence to initiateconversation amongst peers and the instructor. However, the form of communication between thein-person and online offerings differed. While in-person initiated oral communication, the onlinecourses saw increases in chat or written communications. Although it would have been ideal toinitiate more oral communication, limitations beyond the control of the instructor and the studentparticipants restricted this option. Nevertheless, it created an opportunity for students to stillremain engaged and feel free to comment/ask questions throughout the sessions. In otherengineering courses that did not utilize
different from many other invention competitions in that teamwork isstrongly encouraged and the teacher is a vital part of facilitating the process. When studentsparticipate in the InVenture Challenge, they do not work alone at home; rather, they arecollaborating with up to two other student peers and their teacher is guiding them through anengineering design process. As a result, the InVenture Challenge is inclusive and diverse—abouthalf of K-12 participants are female and nearly 40% are underrepresented minorities.The contributions of this paper are two-fold. First, a model is provided for a K-12 innovationprogram housed at a university that is aimed at empowering underrepresented groups in STEMdisciplines by looking further down the pipeline