hypothesis of this Engineering and Engineering Technology FYSP. These will includebut are not limited to: (1) Campus Teaching & Learning Centers; (2) Special programs developedand delivered on first-year student characteristics: (3) First Year student learning approaches;and (4) Instructional delivery modes that engage our students. Being very intentional andproactive, and incorporating ongoing and formative assessment into this work will producesatisfactory results. The commitment is to customize the efforts to reflect our students and ourinstitutional mission in a broad-based, coordinated, and inclusive manner. To move our institutionand students to the next level, we look deeply within and around us to develop and buildprogramming along these
sophomore level courses, e.g. math courses,statics, dynamics, etc. Intellectual growth then progresses towards problems rooted in relativismand commitment. At these stages, students take a more open-ended problem and work to furtherdefine the problem using justified assumptions and provide evidence-based answers.Transitioning to these higher levels of cognition is challenging for students [26]. Therefore, asstudents transition from dualism to relativism in our junior/senior level courses, the commentsagainst the open-ended course project could further reflect this cognitive transition as opposed tothe actual content of the project.In conclusion, we found that student perceptions of the polytechnic nature of a class did notdiffer as pedagogy was
canreflect challenges and experiences students may face as professionals. Students used criteria toconsider the social, economic, and environmental impacts of their designs which helped them tounderstand the importance of sustainability within their designs. The interactions between thestudents and the stakeholders provide the opportunity for students to develop design solutionsthat can benefit both the community and the student. The interactions encourage students tocommunicate effectively and become socially aware of the environmental impact of theirdesigns, which can better prepare them for the global challenges they may face after theirgraduations. Based on the course evaluation at the end of the semester, students reflected that theproject
1 (very low interests) .85 doing work related to working on a project involving to 5 (very high engineering. engineering principles? interest) Engineering 1 The degree to which Students indicated the extent to 4 1 (strongly disagree) .90 Identity students identify themselves which they agreed with statements to 7 (strongly agree) as an engineer. such as, "being an engineer is an important reflection of who I
research is supported by the National Science Foundation (#1920780). Any opinions,findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of theauthor(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.References[1] M. Shah and S. N. Chenicheri, "Using student voice to improve student satisfaction: TwoAustralian universities the same agenda." Journal of Institutional Research (South East Asia)vol., pp. 43-55, 2009.[2] R. Al-Hammoud, "Molding the Interactive Flipped Classroom Based on Students' Feedback".2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Columbus, Ohio, 2017.[3] A. Ieta, R. Manseur, and T. Doyle, "Restructuring Of An Electronics Lab UsingComprehensive Student Feedback", 2010 Annual
personal connections) [3].The main portion of the survey asks students about their overall sense of belonging at differentlevels, while the COVID-19 questions focus on students’ connection with others. With theunderstanding that sense of belonging is a complex construct, we asked students to reflect aboutone specific aspect of it - their connections with others - because we felt it was the most likely tobe affected by online learning formats. The following 10 questions, as listed in Table 1, wereadded to the main survey after items asking about motivation, belonging and identity and beforedemographic questions.Table 1. Survey questions related to COVID-19 effects on students’ learning experiences. Survey Question
reflect the views of the NSF.References[1] National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics. 2021. Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering: 2021. Special Report NSF 21-321. Alexandria, VA: National Science Foundation. Available at https://ncses.nsf.gov/wmpd.[2] E. L. Anderson, K. L. Williams, L. Ponjuan, & H. Frierson, “The 2018 Status Report on Engineering Education: A Snapshot of Diversity in Degrees Conferred in Engineering”, Association of Public & Land-grant Universities: Washington, D.C., 2018.[3] F. McAlear, A. Scott, K. Scott, & S. Weiss, “Women and girls of color in computing.” Data brief. Kapor Center, 2018. Available: https://www.wocincomputing.org
observation rubric. The former assesses thequality of the instructional plan that the RET teachers develop, and the latter evaluates thequality of teachers implementing the lesson plan in the classroom. Both rubrics have beeninitiated and are currently under development. ERC virtual experiences will be the next topiccovered. The type of tools is yet undecided.Acknowledgments This work is supported by the National Science Foundation Grant EEC-2023275. Anyopinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of theauthor(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. We wouldalso like to thank the leadership team, education team, and the evaluation team of all partnerERCs, for
target demographics: underserved and underrepresentedstudents in STEM. In anticipation of this challenge, we collected letters of collaboration from schoolspresented in Table 1. These districts and schools reflect our target student demographics and represent aminimum of 28 elementary schools. Table 1: Collected Collaboration Letters and their Title I StatusSCHOOL TITLE I STATUS SCHOOL TITLE I STATUSCresthaven Academy Charter School 100% St. Rose Grammar School Eligible studentsHoboken Board of Education 60% The Charles H. Bullock School 100%Hoboken Dual Language Charter Sch. 100
so open ended was both a blessing and a curse. I wish the problem statements for the project were a little more focused and detailed with regard to steady state values and specifications.”Some students did express their desire for a hand-on component as opposed to designing atheoretical system. “It would be nice if there was a control system in the UO lab to learn from.”The majority of complaints have been with respect to the implementation of the project into thecourse timeline, as opposed to the value of the project itself. Despite holding multiple project dayseach semester, students frequently reflect on the stress of having too much of the project to finishat the end of the semester. Of particular note is the degree to
abstractconceptualization), and (2) transforming through doing and watching (i.e., activeexperimentation and reflective observation). The complete adaptive learning process requiresthese two critical components. When the students are actively engaged through these learningmodes, their high-order skills are significantly improved [1], [2].Statics is a sophomore-level course required by most engineering majors at universities. Solvingproblems in this course is critical for engineers. It is quite challenging for many students to relatewhat is covered in class to how particles in structural systems behave, especially if they do nothave a good grasp of the concepts. It is then essential for instructors to know what commonmisconceptions students have and how to correct
some instances,and very likely in a large departmental structure with multiple degree programs, the searchprocess captures more courses than a typical construction curriculum would utilize. The searchalso captures “special topics” and “thesis/dissertation” type offerings, which, by definition,would vary in content. Even with these limitations, the course offerings portfolio covers a widerange from architecture to facility management.SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONSThe goal of this paper was to provide an organized review of the construction programs in Texasusing the CIP code designations as a reference. The multi-discipline nature of constructioneducation is clearly reflected in this review. The program names, program CIP designations, andindividual
practices of the University ofMaryland STS program supports students’ macro-ethical reasoning about the world and theirpersonal and professional responsibility within it [36], [37], [3]. Our approach to this researchstudy integrates “outsider” (researcher leads’) and “insider” (participating students’ andundergraduate research fellows’) observations of and reflections on culturally salient events,activities, and artifacts to create ethnographic accounts of which cultural practices [38], [39] areconsequential for shaping engineering students’ macro-ethical reasoning and identity. In thisstudy, we followed students longitudinally over two years of the STS program and developedaccounts of how individuals do and do not take up STS cultural practices
voluntarystudent participation by interrupting lecture to clarify a topic or add information, asking questions from astudent’s perspective, contributing to the teacher’s answers to student questions, empoweringopportunities to respond for the students, allowing for periods of reflection (aka awkward silence), havingsubgroup conversations during peer discussions, and overall encouraging participation from the studentsthrough showing them how and when to ask questions, share answers and contribute relevant information.The co-teacher should be encouraged to cover multiple personas throughout the course term, such ascontributing with high-level answers, answering a teacher question wrong, asking very easy questions,expending the longer time to state a
and do not necessarily reflect the view of the National Science Foundation.References [1] R. D. Shulman, EdTech Investments Rise to a Historical $9.5 Billion: What Your Startup Needs To Know, Forbes, Jan. 2018. [2] T. Wan, US EdTech investments peak again with $1.45 billion raised in 2018, EdSurge, Jan. 2019. [3] ——, (Jan. 2021). “A Record Year Amid a Pandemic: US Edtech Raises $2.2 Billion in 2020,” [Online]. Available: https://www.edsurge.com/news/2021-01-13-a-record-year- amid-a-pandemic-us-edtech-raises-2-2-billion-in-2020 (visited on 01/30/2022). [4] HolonIQ. (Jun. 2021). “Global EdTech Funding 2021 - Half Year Update - $10B of EdTech investment in 1H 2021 through 568 EdTech Funding Rounds,” [Online]. Available
. Figure 1 – Canvas Module for HydrostaticsSpecifications GradingSpecifications grading is not a hard set of rules, but rather an encouragement to think outside thebox when it comes to grading. However, Nilson (2015) provides a number of guidelines thathave led to particularly successful grading schemes. Among other things, they should reflect thestudent learning outcomes and make expectations clear, motivate students to learn and excel,discourage cheating, and be simple and easy to understand. Not all specifications gradingschemes will achieve all of Nilson’s recommendations, but a well-designed scheme can come alot closer than the traditional grading methodology.In our opinion, the most valuable benefit of specifications grading is the ability
of the homework assignments that they receive helpfrom the solutions we provide. We ask students to provide written comments reflecting on theirassignments and describing how they graded it. Students have commented that they find theimmediate feedback very helpful.To test student understanding of basic concepts, we administer 6 automatically graded onlinequizzes. We also provide students time during class to work and collaborate on 26 in classassignments, 6 of which are selected at random and graded. Half of these 26 assignments are tobe completed by-hand, while the other half require computer coding.We give a total of four in class tests. Two tests are by hand only and two tests require students towrite computer code. On the by hand tests
defined here, embraces engineering literacy.While it is easy to demonstrate that design for profit of this kind can be harmful of theenvironment, and it is often done, the difficulties that this creates for the economy are seldomdiscussed. If artefacts are made to last twice as long, fewer of them will be required, profitsmay be reduced, and fewer people will be required to produce them. Arguments about whatshould be done are the essence of moral philosophy, and create situations in which learnersare required to reflect on their values.Clearly, the practice of IT is something that has to be pursued throughout the programme andwill continued to be pursued subsequently. That is the way it is. Similarly, there is a basis fora design and make
] can create barriers to mentoring access for ethnic minority students as well as become a hurdle to fostering commitment to mentoring ethnic minority students11. Deal with intergroup or diversity-based anxiety and unresolved identity and cross-cultural competence issues: Faculty mentors, especially White faculty, must seek help to deal with any element of intergroup or diversity based anxiety and the truths in mentoring [54], lack of cross-cultural competence, unresolved personal racial identity and cultural insecurity as these can create dysfunctional relationships that may negatively impact the career outcomes of minority students [55]12. Be reflective of your own experience: Be willing to reflect upon your own
the AGEP-NC Alliance can befound in [15-18].One of the areas for critical reflection within the departments is the advisor-advisee relationship.In this paper, we examine faculty perceptions of the frequency with which they provide keyadvising benefits with students’ perceptions of receiving those same benefits and compare howstudents’ perceptions differ based on underrepresentation status. We present updated findingsfrom [19], focusing on baseline surveys from engineering and computer science departments atthe three AGEP-NC universities and answer the following questions: 1. What advising practices do faculty report using with doctoral students? What advising practices do dissertation-stage doctoral students report receiving? Are
solutions [7]. "The Village of Yakutia has about 50,000 people. Its harsh winters and remote location make heating a living space very expensive. The rising price of fossil fuels has been reflected in the heating expenses of Yakutia residents. In fact, many residents are unable to afford heat for the entire winter (5 months). A North Eastern Federal University study shows that 38% of village residents have gone without heat for at least 30 winter days in the last 24 months. Last year, 27 Yakutia deaths were attributed to unheated homes. Most died from hypothermia/exposure (21), and the remainder died in fires or from carbon monoxide poisoning that resulted from improper use of alternative heat
, or recommendations expressed in thismaterial are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NationalScience Foundation.8. References[1] N. Baumer and J. Frueh, “What is Neurodiversity?,” Harvard Health, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/what-is-neurodiversity-202111232645. [Accessed: 15-Dec-2022].[2] S. Comberousse, “A begginer’s guide to neurodiversity,” Learning Disability Today, 2019. [Online]. Available: https://www.learningdabilitytoday.co.uk/abeginners-guide-o- diversity. [Accessed: 15-Dec-2022].[3] E. V. Cole and S. W. Cawthon, “Self-disclosure decisions of university students with learning disabilities,” J. Postsecond. Educ. Disabil., vol
progress on implementation and ask questions of the project team andeach other. The check-ins served to obtain implementation data and foster a learning communityamong teachers. These informal discussions were recorded and summarized within one week ofeach discussion in order to share teacher feedback related to critical components, adaptations,and challenges with the project team. At the end of the first semester of implementation,researchers conducted semi-structured, in-person interviews, lasting 45 - 60 minutes. Theseinterviews were guided by a protocol including questions and follow-up prompts aligned to eachcritical component along with questions designed to elicit reflections on factors influencingimplementation. These interviews were
semesterthat they can still be completed incrementally towards the overall project goal. One positive isthat the competition-provided training activities strongly encourage students to explain theirassumptions and engineering judgments that were made in justifying the design. Thus, studentscan still be evaluated on these elements of their reasoning about the end product that areincorporated into the competition deliverables. In the interest of minimizing duplicated or unnecessary student work, it may also beuseful to consider the various elements of the Deliverable Packages that may have some overlapwith the preliminary and intermediate design process steps. In the case of the Development Plandocument, students are asked to reflect on the
occurred in spring andfall of 2022. During these conversations, administrators were asked to reflect on theimplementation of the e4usa program at their school, their personal experiences with thisprocess, and barriers or suggestions in expanding this program both locally and more broadly.The transcripts of these interviews and focus groups were analyzed using descriptive coding [1]by two researchers. During this process the codes were categorized and then emergent themeswere identified. The findings indicate that administrators have a range of personal experiencewith implementing this engineering program, and that often these experiences were reported as abenefit to the entire school. For instance, administrators often referred to connections made
growth in adaptiveness as students progress through their degree program.The first two results of this study [18] are somewhat consistent with those of the previous study [17]. Thediscrepancies stated above may be attributed to the smaller sample size in the second study and will beinvestigated further in subsequent work. It should also be noted that an interview protocol was developedand interviews conducted with low-income students as part of [18]. Preliminary analysis of theseinterviews revealed that different majors at Stevens provide different metacognitive opportunities forstudents within that particular program. Particular reference was made to programming and designactivities that inherently required self-reflection at various points in
can learnfrom that” [Student 23] and another, ”Really nice intro course to data science, made taking theBusiness Intelligence class alongside it more manageable.” [Student 9]. This indicates that thequality of the support for hands-on exercises impacts student learning and interest in DataScience.AcknowledgementThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under AwardIUSE 2021287. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in thismaterial are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National ScienceFoundation. The authors thank Dr. Kimberly Fluet for her contribution in designing the surveyquestions and collecting/analyzing the survey data. The authors also
cohorts of graduate students who study in the U.S. institutionsof higher education. The section below outlines typical communicational difficulties occurredbetween culturally diverse student cohorts on the U.S. campuses.3.2. Communication Challenges Between American and International Students while atSchoolMatsuda & Silva [6] pointed that International students had faced anxiety and challenges whilebeing at an American Institutions. Often, their unwillingness to communicate with domesticEnglish-native speaker peers indicates various fears. For instance, “One of the students who theyhave wrote about is Park, a student from Korea. Park in his reflective commentary had writtenabout how depressed he was about getting a good grade and how he
game, including1) Network Strength (measured by number of improvements), 2) Inequity of Improvements(measured by the maximum difference in improvements for different neighborhoods), 3)Inequity of Restoration (measured by the maximum difference in the number of non-operationalcomponents for neighborhoods), 4) System Functionality (measured by the total number ofoperational components), and 5) Community Resilience (measured by the area under recoverycurve). Teams consider all five of these objectives as they make infrastructure decisions whichare considered in final game scoring. At the end of the game each team community’sperformance is compared among the other teams based on the scoring system reflecting the fiveobjectives. The exact scoring
survey were operationalized so that respondents had a shared understanding of what wasbeing asked. The online survey and Institutional Review Board-approved protocols for issuingthe survey were designed to preserve anonymity so that respondents could answer morecandidly. While termed a “Lightning Poll” to reflect a practicable survey design for busy deansand department chairs, the survey was more robust than that title indicates. The survey,conducted in Qualtrics XM (Qualtrics, Seattle, Washington), was issued in September 2022 andconcluded in October 2022. The survey and a de-identified data sample are available uponrequest to the corresponding author.Survey ResultsResponse DemographicsOf the deans and chairs that responded to the survey, 73 of