virtual learning environment in a university class,” Comput. Educ., vol. 56, no. 2, pp. 495–504, 2011, doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2010.09.012.[2] J. Barker and P. Gossman, “The learning impact of a virtual learning environment : students’ views,” Teach. Educ., vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 19–38, 2013.[3] H. Waheed, S. U. Hassan, N. R. Aljohani, J. Hardman, S. Alelyani, and R. Nawaz, “Predicting academic performance of students from VLE big data using deep learning models,” Comput. Human Behav., vol. 104, no. November 2018, p. 106189, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2019.106189.[4] J. Kuzilek, J. Vaclavek, Z. Zdrahal, and V. Fuglik, “Analysing Student VLE Behaviour Intensity and Performance.,” in Transforming Learning with
generalizability.Data Collection and ContextRachel is a Hispanic woman pursuing an undergraduate degree in Computer Science atSoutheastern Public University (SPU), a Hispanic Serving Institution in the Southeastern UnitedStates. She is one of the participants admitted into a Scholarship and Support Program (SSP), anNSF S-STEM [18] program at SPU, launched in September 2021 as a collaborative scholarshipand educational research effort at three public research universities in the Southeast UnitedStates. The program is designed to support lower-income students pursuing a degree in acomputing field, including computer science, information technology, cybersecurity, andcomputer engineering, through scholarship and a variety of co-curricular activities, including
Progress: Implementing a Tiger Team in a Capstone Design CourseAbstractThis paper reports on the initial implementation of a two student “tiger team” in an engineeringcapstone design class. A tiger team is a small group of individuals that covers a range ofexpertise and is assigned when challenges arise that helps address the root issues causing thechallenge. The term was coined in the 1960’s in the Cold War; tiger teams are used in industry,government, and military organizations. While tiger teams in these situations are usually formedaround an issue then disbanded, in the capstone class the tiger team was formed for the durationof the two semester long class; details on formation and the larger context and organization ofthe class are discussed
formal universe of DEIdiscourse and planning as unrelated to “under-representation.” The fact that Black communitiesin the U.S. live in the afterlife of slavery [33], or that trans folks are murdered with regularity,are not ignored; rather these events are unthinkable in proximity to efficacious engineering.DEI as a neoliberal catchall academic term functions with an aim of reconciliation, laden withmoves to innocence obscuring notions of equity that act with an ethic of incommensurability. AsTuck and Yang discuss, …an ethic of incommensurability, which recognizes what is distinct, what is sovereign for project(s) of decolonization in relation to human and civil rights based social justice projects … guides moves that unsettle
, separating themselves from the situation(s) where the virus waspresent. This may come in the form of switching majors away from science, technology,engineering, and mathematics, to changing departments, universities, or even jobs. To preventthis attrition, ingroup experts and peers inoculate one’s self-concept by creating environmentsthat foster social belonging (Tse, Logel, & Spencer, 2011). In fact, “recruitment and retention ofunderrepresented groups who are newcomers at entry level is closely dependent on the visibility”of ingroup members (Dasgupta, 2011a). A stronger and more stable sense of belonging is onlyone benefit these ‘social vaccines’ can have. Exposure to ingroup experts and peers in high-achievement environments strengthens
those next in line to successfully compete for tenure-track facultylines are not receiving sufficient mentoring, the structural systems of power in higher educationare persisting. If this is the case, the call to action in diversifying the engineering professoriate isgoing unheard.Funding AcknowledgementThis research is sponsored by the National Science Foundation (NSF) Alliances for GraduateEducation and the Professoriate (AGEP; award numbers: 1821298, 1821019, 1821052, and1821008). Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations are those of only theauthors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSF.ReferencesAllen-Ramdial, S.-A. A., & Campbell, A. G. (2014). Reimagining the pipeline: Advancing STEM diversity
Paper ID #32440Gender Differences in Construction Management Students’ Sense of Belong-ingDr. Luciana Debs, Purdue University Programs Luciana Debs, is an Assistant Professor of Construction Management in the School Construction Man- agement Technology at Purdue University. She received her PhD from Purdue University Main Campus, her MS from the Technical Research Institute of Sao Paulo (IPT-SP), and BArch from the University of S˜ao Paulo (USP), in Sao Paulo, Brazil. Prior to her current position she worked in design coordination in construction and real estate development companies in Brazil. Her research is mainly
options: A meta-analytic path analysis of the social-cognitive choice model by gender and race/ethnicity,” Journal of Counseling Psychology, vol. 65, no. 1, pp. 17–35, 2018. 2 A. Bandura, “Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change,” Psychological Review, vol. 84, no. 2, pp. 191–215, 1977. 3 A. Bandura, “The explanatory and predictive scope of self-efficacy theory,” Journal of Clinical and Social Psychology, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 359–373, 1986. 4 R. W. Lent, S. D. Brown, and G. Hackett, “Toward a unifying social cognitive theory of career and academic interest, choice, and performance,” Journal of Vocational Behavior, vol. 45, no. 1, pp. 79–122, 1994. 5 H.-B. Sheu, R. W. Lent, M
what you know? Figure 2. Short writing example involving exploration of topics in Physics 230.During the third week of class, students were given a short in-class writing activity in the form ofa classroom assessment technique (CAT) pioneered by Angelo and Cross [22]. Often referred toas a “minute paper” the students were asked two questions which are illustrated in Figure 3. 1. What was the most useful or meaningful thing you learned during our session together today? 2. What question(s) remain uppermost in your mind as we ended the session? Figure 3. Short writing example using a classroom assessment technique (CAT) in Physics 230.The CAT was given anonymously during class and students were given a small
a learning environment in STEMeducation [1], but less is known about conducting engineering design challenge activities inhome environments. Although many studies highlight the development of STEM concepts andskills, more research is needed to understand how to support this development through caregiver-child interactions at home. This study aims to (a) investigate caregiver-child interactions thatsupport the development of child(ren)’s STEM conceptualizations and skills in engineeringdesign challenge activities within family pedagogical practices, and (b) examine caregivers’pedagogical expectations within family pedagogy. Guided by Vygotsky’s cultural-historicalview, the authors analyze child(ren)’s development of STEM conceptualizations
value system with their definitions in terms ofmotivational goal(s) [3, p.7]:Values Conceptual definitions in terms of motivational goalsSelf-direction – Freedom to cultivate one’s own ideas and abilitiesthoughtSelf-direction – action Freedom to determine one’s own actionsStimulation Excitement, novelty, and changeHedonism Pleasure and sensuous gratificationAchievement Success according to social standardsPower – dominance Power through exercising control over peoplePower – resources Power through control of material and social resourcesFace Security and power through maintaining one’s public image and
grading platform (Marmoset), which is capable of doing functional assessment ofstudent code, but not an assessment of style, nor of design. The shift to automatic grading for onequestion also necessitated that the question had to be highly structured, though the otherquestion(s) were similar to past years. All of the assignment questions required coding in C++.2.2.3 MTE121 Course ProjectThe course project in 2019 was to design and implement a mechatronic/robot system of thestudents’ choosing, while meeting a set of given specifications for the mechanical system(number of sensors and motors) and the software (number of functions); taking place over thelast 5 weeks of the term. Students, in groups of three or four had the freedom to choose their
of degrees compared to the number ofindustry jobs (i.e., involving the design, manufacturing, regulation, and sale of products andservices in the biomedical sector) available for biomedical engineers in the 1970’s and 1980’s[9]. However, as more programs have developed and the number of graduates has increased, theratio of graduates to the number of industry job openings has become less promising [6]. Further,research on student job placement shows that the history of BME program development asintentionally broad and unique to each institution’s faculty strengths [9], may have had anegative impact on industry’s perceptions of BME graduates, limiting BME student industrycareer placement upon graduation [5], [9], [11], [12]. These studies
Paper ID #32834Emergency Transition of Intro Communication and Design Course to RemoteTeachingMr. Clay Swackhamer, University of California, Davis Clay is a PhD candidate at UC Davis working under the supervision of Dr. Gail M. Bornhorst in the department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering. His research focuses on the breakdown of solid foods during gastric digestion and the development of improved in vitro models for studying digestion.Dr. Jennifer Mullin, University of California, Davis Jennifer S. Mullin is an Assistant Professor of Teaching in the Department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering. She has a
. Another page of the survey asked students to select one or two nouns(among 14 options) that best describe the nature of the role they took in the context of the team.Nouns connoted various conceptions of leadership (e.g., Director, Sheriff), fellowship (e.g.,Therapist, Referee), and followship (e.g., Assistant, Secretary).Part 4. Explain Choices. The final page required participants to offer some explanation orclarification of their previous responses by answering at least one of two prompts: (a) “How didYOU decide how much individual effort to invest in each design task?” (b) “What other verb(s)or noun(s) describe how YOU contributed to the design project and functioned within yourTEAM? Why?”AnalysisThe WTCS data were analyzed using quantitative
outcomes, and interpersonal outcomes. Empathic processesresemble the skills dimension of Walther et al.’s [6] model of empathy in engineering andmanifest through perspective-taking, self/other awareness, and related skills. As this modelemphasizes, however, one’s orientation to others and one’s behavioral dispositions also play akey role in determining whether one will empathize. Thus, as one example, numerous factorsinfluence ‘team member understanding.’ Moreover, as Davis’s model emphasizes, this type ofintrapersonal understanding can promote interpersonal action or behavior.Second, empathy can promote positive teaming environments. Such positive teamingenvironments may be evident through a lack of negative valences, such as limited frustration
completed several instruments that helped you learn more about yourself, including the MBTI, Kolb Learning Styles, Strength-Finders, Emotional Intelligence, Etc. How important were the results of that learning about self to your leadership development? 8 Regarding the self-assessment instruments above, indicate the impact on you during the course. If one or more of these has had an impact in your life, please identify the instrument(s): MBTI, Kolb Learning Styles, Strengths-Finder Assessment (or equivalent), Emotional Intelligence (EQ) in Actin Profile or other (specify), and what was that impact? 9 You also completed a 360-degree instrument (Zenger-Folkman 360
instructor-centric teaching performances.The remainder of this subsection is organized paragraph-wise according to the context ofteaching methods. Each paragraph contains a synthesis of studies concerning one context-area:out-of-class activities, in-class activities, projects/labs, or lectures.Three of the four studies focus on out-of-class methods [5], [10], [11], while two concernin-class methods [12], [8] ([8] applies both in- and out-of-class). [5] and [9] both study the effectof online homework on student learning. [9]’s WeBWorK framework is a simple, open-sourceonline homework platform which translates typical circuits problems into a digital context,randomizing values in problems to prevent cheating. The authors conclude that WeBWorK “is
leadership skills. An important finding of this study was theeffect self-selection into co-curriculars like undergraduate research can have on studies usingself-report measures of student outcomes as a comparison tool. The study found that studentswho engaged in undergraduate research tended to report higher skills, but when accounting forboth curricular and classroom experiences, few differences were seen between students who didor did not participate. This and similar work have contributed to knowledge about “what types”of engagement in co-curricular experiences are most significant for engineering students. UntilFisher et al.’s recent work, however, a thorough review of the potential relationships betweenspecific co-curricular opportunities and
to examine H1 for each camp. This sectionprovides the results of the statistical analyses. It starts with the 2019 in-person camps and endswith the 2020 virtual camps.For S.H.E. camp, two tailed paired t-test results, shown in Table 9, show that the camp increased,on average, participants’ interest, understanding, and excitement for engineering. Q1 hadstatistically significant increases with the lowest mean level being moderate interest or higher.Q2 had statistically significant increases and indicated a good to very good level ofunderstanding. Q3’s results indicate participants were excited about engineering before and afterattending the camp. © American Society for Engineering Education, 2021
coding and categorization procedure, a sampling of studentdefinitions and the assigned codes/categories are shown in Table 3. It is important to note that asingle definition may be coded into multiple categories depending on the specific phrases itincludes. As previously stated, the newly declared and senior design students’ responses to theadditional open-ended questions were not analyzed directly; instead, these responses providedcontext for discussion of the associated student population definition of BME.Table 2. Specific codes and organizing categories which emerged from qualitative coding ofstudent definitions of BME (italic text lists the words or phrases identified during in vivocoding) Category Code(s
. Page 12.840.104.2.4 Determining Shift Points Given the discussion above, one can, in principle, use the nakedeye to read the shift points off the acceleration vs. speed curves shown in Figure 5. However, first gear (a) (b) acceleration (m/s 2 ) acceleration (m/s 2 ) second gear 6 6 third gear 4 fourth gear
the multidisciplinary aspect ofengineering related activities in order to show connections between math and science.AcknowledgementThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Page 12.785.10Foundation under Grant Number 0440568. All opinions expressed withinare the authors' and do not necessarily reflect those of the National Science Foundation.Bibliography1. National Science Foundation, NSF Graduate Teaching Fellows In K-12 Education (GK-12) http://www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=5472&from=fund2. A. Caicedo, J. Lyons, S. Thompson, (2006) “Investigating Outcomes for GK-12 Teacher Partners and GK-12
project are considered independent. In reporting scores the namingconventions from the previous section are used to identify different elements of the peerevaluation instrument. Mean scores given to students are reported in italics, for exampleOverall. Scores given by students are identified by the subscript G and scores received by thesubscript R, for example OverallR corresponds to the mean score received on the overallevaluation section of the evaluation. The range of scores given or received was determined bythe standard deviations and are reported as s(OverallG), i.e. the standard deviation of the overallscores given by the students in the sample.There were few significant correlations between scores students gave or received for
engineers and scientists continues to rise faster than thesupply. The US is simply not producing the numbers of engineers and scientists needed. Couplethis with the fact that there is a huge wave of baby boomers reaching retirement age thatcurrently provide a great amount of scientific and engineering services. We all are facing asubstantial problem. This problem is magnified for DoD which requires that its workforce be UScitizens capable of obtaining the appropriate level of security clearances. The need for UScitizens working in Science and Engineering (S&E) will continue to be in demand as technologycontinues to advance exponentially and the need for S&E in our nations defense continues. Thispaper explores a comprehensive and proactive