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
U.S. and several countries. More than 75 authored or co-authored peer-reviewed publications, 100 conference papers and project reports, and several software packages and databases have been produced from this research. Dr. Burian’s enthusiasm for student learning has led to numerous teaching awards and the creation of new pedagogical approaches directed toward multi-institution collaborative learning. He has also sought to advance teaching effectiveness of engineering educators by serving as mentor at the American Society of Civil Engineers ExCEEd Teaching Workshop and as the developer of a vari- ety of teaching and curriculum development workshops, including the recent Wasatch Experience at the University of
environments with the goal of improving learning opportunities for students and equipping faculty with the knowledge and skills necessary to create such opportunities. One of the founding faculty at Olin Col- lege, Dr. Zastavker has been engaged in development and implementation of project-based experiences in fields ranging from science to engineering and design to social sciences (e.g., Critical Reflective Writing; Teaching and Learning in Undergraduate Science and Engineering, etc.) All of these activities share a common goal of creating curricular and pedagogical structures as well as academic cultures that facilitate students’ interests, motivation, and desire to persist in engineering. Through this work, outreach, and
Paper ID #26352Factors Influencing the Interest Levels of Male versus Female Students goinginto STEM Fields (Evaluation)Dr. Murad Musa Mahmoud, Wartburg College Murad is an Assistant Professor at the Engineering Science Department at Wartburg College. He has a Ph.D. in Engineering Education from Utah State University. Research interests include recruitment into STEM, diversity in STEM as well pedagogy and instruction.Ms. Jessica Marie Faber, Wartburg College Jessica is a student at Wartburg College studying Engineering Science with a minor in Creative Writing and Mathematics. She is active with soccer at Wartburg and works
projects, which required them to do additionalanalysis and research on a topic of their choosing and, importantly, incorporate site visits and theknowledge gained from those visits into the project.Finally, we borrowed some aspects of the Montessori Method17 that we felt might proveadvantageous. Engineering Rome is (1) a multi-level, course (i.e., appropriate for Freshmanthrough graduate students) designed to foster peer learning, and (2) the final project is a guidedchoice work activity with the instructor serving in the role of Montessori’s “directress.” WhileMontessori’s writings generally concern early aged learning (and not college students), we feltthere was substantial evidence that these ideas would be beneficial. For instance, Katz et al
Affairs, and International system, Officer of Diversity, Latina/o Affairs Education Policy (PhD)6 Human Development, Assistant professor of education, coordinator of STEM emphasis on reading and education for teacher preparation; currently planning a literacy (PhD) collaborative proposal with other faculty and administrators for a STEM Center at the request of the institution. Over the course of the last two years, collaborated with faculty in Engineering to write grant proposals for programs that would provide professional development for teachers
Sociology at Marquette University and a M.S. and Ph.D. in Sociology at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. The courses she teach include Social Problems, Race & Ethnicity, Social Strati- fication, and the Sociology Senior Seminar. She was an Association for the Study of Higher Education /Lumina Fellow in 2003. Dr. Smith’s primary research interests include examining racial and class dispar- ities within the higher education system. She also writes on policy issues dealing with mentoring, access, retention, equity, and diversity in higher education. She has over 10 years of experience researching how colleges and universities can assist underrepresented students with understanding and navigating the insti- tutional
Accelerator is the Design Thinking Process developed by the Hasso-Plattner Institute ofDesign at Stanford, in which students are encouraged to empathize, define, ideate, prototype, andtest their inventions [5]. The learning objectives for students in the Summer Accelerator mirrorthose set out for students participating in the year-long program, including: choosing a problemand writing a problem statement about how people experience this problem; ideating solutions tothat problem that are better or less expensive than devices that are currently available; sketchingand making a prototype of their idea; obtaining feedback through conferencing and user surveys;and presenting their project to an audience through a “pitch.”Students in the Summer
achieved when informed byethically motivated technology experts, including engineers, as injecting ethics into theformation of policy begins with those who write it. For these reasons, it would be valuable tounderstand the relationship between the variables that may influence a technology expert in theirpursuance of a policy career path, such as the development of their various identities (personaland social, engineering, and ethical identities) of these engineers. Discussions have taken placeregarding public policy engineering workforce expectations and development and the use ofthese various identities, particularly ethics identity, in establishing a policy career pathway forengineers. There is not an explicit connection between the influence of
differentfrom their advisor’s approach) for their thesis or dissertation projects. One additional purposethese graduate students had for searching was to more broadly find literature in their disciplinaryfield. This was especially the case for graduate students whose labs held journal clubs ormeetings where they were expected to regularly share and report out on current literature.The five faculty participants also had multiple reasons for searching the scholarly literature.Some were actively engaged in writing grant proposals and needed literature to demonstrate therelevance of their proposed projects. Faculty also searched the literature to keep tabs on whattheir academic competitors were doing, as well as to look for inspiration from peers in their
ofoutreach program goals, by setting a goal of the program to increase students’ level ofknowledge and clarity around the engineering domain and career trajectory. This wouldresult in a better student-field fit, thereby increasing the likelihood of continued participation inthe program. In addition, it could potentially decrease their likelihood of future attrition from ormigration within a four-year degree program. It can also help inform program activity design -for example including peer-connections and panel events to connect outreach programparticipants with current students and researchers from various engineering domains allied to theoutreach participants’ selected field of study. This provided the outreach program participantswith a richer
questions and how they interacted with their peers during thediscussion. The students held steadfast to the discussion guidelines, exhibiting respect andconsideration for their fellow students, allowing for a deeper conversation. As the class consistsof senior engineering students, the expectation was that they would be able to identify theengineering failures, but may struggle with the discussion on racial inequities due to a lack ofexposure in previous engineering courses. Surprisingly, the students understood and articulatedthe impact of institutional discrimination on the events leading up to and response to HurricaneKatrina.However, not all of the students reviewed the reading material prior to class. Since a largeportion of the class had not
synonymously in the literature; however, postgraduate can either refer to aperson who has earned a high school diploma or who has also earned a collegiate-level degree.Graduate students and undergraduate students often follow different paths in the academicenvironment. They serve divergent roles, face separate challenges, and have differentexperiences. Graduate students face obstacles beyond the classroom—in their ability to meetwith advisers, attend conferences, and develop social support from their peers—thatundergraduate students may not face [3]. Even in the classroom graduate students may beexpected to meet different expectations than their undergraduate counterparts. This may includea greater volume of reading and reading assignments provided
theconcepts and each new lab assignment. We also presented strategies for approaching the labassignment and writing the report. Unfortunately, this approach does not scale well with theincreasing class size. Hence, we wanted to find a strategy for student success that scales wellwith the growing number of students, without compromising on instruction and that helps free upthe lab time that may be used to provide one-on-one time with students.1.1 Discovery of the Issues in Fall ’18 and Spring ‘19The motivation for using the flipped class delivery method for the lab instructions is based on theobservation of student performance and outcomes in Fall 2018 and Spring 2019. We analyzedthe lab assignment submission rate and earned lab grades. Figure 1 shows
seeing an increased number ofstudents coming in with college credit, either Advanced Placement (AP) or other. In 2014 whenthe original cornerstone pilot was completed, over 50% of entering students had some AP creditin Calculus, 20% had Chemistry credit, 35% have College Writing credit and 35% have Physicscredit. These students as well as current students with advanced credit face a limited courseselection to complete their academic schedules in these early semesters since it is difficult to findcourses that they can take in the first year that do not have prerequisites. This created the need torevise the curriculum to offer students the opportunity to accelerate their exploration of anengineering major. In order to accomplish this, students
, incorporating design work, self-assessmentand reflection, prototyping and creation, all with supervision and support. Another corecomponent is empowered peer-to-peer mentoring: PRL course assistants (CAs) are graduatestudents who have themselves been burnished in the cauldron of the PRL. They understand theelation of success and the opportunity within failure – and know how to turn both into learningmoments for students. The PRL CAs are guided by four faculty, and these groups collectivelyform a community of practice with mixed levels of experience, knowledge, skills, and abilities.Students learn from faculty, CAs, and peers; CAs learn from faculty, students, and other CAs;and faculty learn from students, CAs, and each other. This forms a rich fabric
general and engineering in particular almostexclusively focus on students of color. In effect, this research studies socioeconomic class bystudying race and ethnicity. While many low-income and first-generation students are also racialand ethnic minorities, not all students of color experience socioeconomic inequality. Moreover,this analytic frame misses many poor white students who do not have access to the samenetworks and support groups as do their peers who are students of color (e.g. MinorityEngineering Programs, Society of Hispanic Professional Engineers, National Society of BlackEngineers, etc.).In fact, socioeconomic inequalities, as distinct from racial and ethnic inequalities, rarely appearin definitions of diversity in STEM education
instructions to serving as a facilitator and advisor, allowing students to work on challenges and failures on their own and with their peers. 2. Assessing the feasibility of implementing the curriculum in rural STEM classrooms: Teacher’s feedback during learning community sessions, interview and focus group responses, and responses to the Stages of Concern (SOC) questionnaire from the Concerns- Based Adoption Model (CBAM) suggest that teachers were engaged with the program and found the model usable and feasible to implement. 3. Collecting initial data on the program’s effects on the classroom environment and student’s engagement and interest in engineering: the researchers collected evidence on changes to
programs are a critical mechanism for enhancing teaching effectiveness(e.g., [9], [10], [11]). These programs aim to equip educators with the necessary skills andknowledge to improve their teaching methods, such as integrating technology, employinginnovative assessment strategies, and centering student learning [12]. Research indicates thatcomprehensive faculty development programs that include workshops, peer and studentfeedback, and communities of practice can significantly enhance faculty teaching abilities andstudent learning experiences [13]. In STEM, these programs offer faculty members theopportunity to engage with contemporary pedagogical theories and practices, participate in amulti-disciplinary learning community, practice active
Paper ID #34313Work in Progress: Using Cost-effective Educational Robotics Kits inEngineering EducationMs. Caroline Grace Sawatzki, Saginaw Valley State University Caroline Sawatzki is a senior in the Electrical & Computer Engineering program at Saginaw Valley State University (SVSU), and has adopted a double minor in Mathematics and Japanese. Caroline expresses her love for helping her peers succeed academically through her employment at the SVSU Writing Center, where she assists students in the development of their professional and research writing skills. During her undergraduate education, Caroline has visited
focused on youth with these identities.Search strategyWe used a standard systematic review approach following the PRISMA guidelines [23]. Wesearched three education-related databases: ERIC (EBSCO), Education Source, and AustralianEducation Index (also known as “International ERIC”). We composed a search string usingkeywords for concepts related to our objective (Table 1), and completed the search in December2023. We limited our search to 1993 onward, papers written in English, and peer-reviewedresearch work.Table 1: Search terms used. Search strings for each concept were combined with AND to createan overall search string. Note that listing “science” or “engineering” alone in the content conceptgave many extraneous results, so content and type
cognizant of international student needs while integrating diversity 1718 activities into WIEP mentoring programs. We also recognized, as others have before that the international participants in our program could help to increase multicultural awareness for our domestic participants, while conversely, domestic students can support the integration of international peers into the university. While other studies related to cultural aspects of mentoring in education tend to focus on three primary themes surrounding the mentoring relationship, organizational structure, and “manner in which ethnicity and societal beliefs relate
Ghaisas, University of Oklahoma Shalaka has pursued a B.A. in Economics and M.A. in English from Fergusson College. She has com- pleted her MS in Teaching and Curriculum from Syracuse University.Dr. Xun Ge, University of Oklahoma Dr. Xun Ge (University of Oklahoma, xge@ou.edu) is Professor of Instructional Psychology and Tech- nology in the Department of Educational Psychology, Jeannine Rainbolt College of Education, the Uni- versity of Oklahoma. Her research expertise involves the design of question prompts in scaffolding stu- dents’ complex and ill-structured problem solving and self-regulated learning. Dr. Ge (2004) developed a conceptual framework using question prompts and peer interactions to facilitate
use of experimental centric pedagogy in a variety of settings and through multiple methods; the most frequent use was in a laboratory course with peers. Table 2 Use of ADB in Varied Instructional Modalities* Pre Post Instructional Modality Median % Used Median % Used Response 6+ times Response 6+ times Location/Setting of Use In a class setting Never 10 3 times
at the university level and as they pursue careers in industry. Graduating this December, she hopes to retain this knowledge for the benefit of herself and other women engineers as she pursues an industry career.Dr. Jon A. Leydens, Colorado School of Mines Jon A. Leydens is Associate Professor of Engineering Education Research in the Division of Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences at the Colorado School of Mines, USA. Dr. Leydens’ research and teaching interests are in engineering education, communication, and social justice. Dr. Leydens is author or co- author of 40 peer-reviewed papers, co-author of Engineering and Sustainable Community Development (Morgan and Claypool, 2010), and editor of Sociotechnical
learning goals and explore potential new learninggoals.Qualitative DataA total of 297 weekly reflection papers and 27 final papers from 27 undergraduate studentsacross two independent cohorts served as the source of data for this qualitative research study.For the weekly reflection papers, the students were asked to reflect on their experiences duringthe weekly T-Group. The students were asked to write a reflection about situations which had asignificant impact on them. The weekly reflection papers enabled the author to perform alongitudinal analysis in regards to the student’s development of their authentic leadership skillsand to conduct triangulation of the data between individuals, peers, and facilitator.For the final papers (min. 3,500 words
Feminist Research in Engineering Education (FREE, formerly RIFE, group), whose diverse projects and group members are described at feministengineering.org. She received a CAREER award in 2010 and a PECASE award in 2012 for her project researching the stories of undergraduate engineering women and men of color and white women. She received ASEE-ERM’s best paper award for her CAREER research, and the Denice Denton Emerging Leader award from the Anita Borg Institute, both in 2013. She helped found, fund, and grow the PEER Collaborative, a peer mentoring group of early career and re- cently tenured faculty and research staff primarily evaluated based on their engineering education research productivity. She can be contacted
to understand and do well in thesubject (or competence and performance), and recognition by meaningful others (e.g., peers,instructors, family, etc.)[42], [43]. This framing is based on prior work in science education.Carlone and Johnson [44] developed a framework for science role identity from interviews withwomen of Color professionals that included performance, competence, and recognition. Later, intranslating this framework to undergraduate students in physics, Hazari and colleagues [45] addedinterest as an important facet of the student experience and developed quantitative measuresassociated with the four constructs. They found that for undergraduate students, performance andcompetence were not two separate factors but rather a single
or early spring, the REEMS program sponsors materials professionals in“brown bag” seminars to discuss their careers, their academic backgrounds, and are asked toreview the mentors, teachers, and faculty who influenced their decisions that led them to theircurrent positions. The speakers conclude with words-of-wisdom to students regarding futurestudies and careers. Each of the professionals welcomes the opportunity to talk further withinterested students. Either in the fall or spring the REEMS PI, in collaboration with HCC student services,sponsors a series of student development workshops that emphasize the development of skills intime management, resume writing, and how to apply for scholarships, internships, collegetransfer, and