assessment in higher education: Learning for the longer term, Routledge, 2007. [2] S. Gulati, K. Bhandari, and P. Mathur, "Program evaluation in higher education: A systematic review", in Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, vol. 32, no. 1, 2020, pp. 1-24. [3] J. Hattie and H. Timperley, "The power of feedback", in Review of Educational Research, vol. 77, no. 1, 2007, pp. 81-112. [4] Yale University, Peer review of teaching, Poorvu Center for Teaching and Learning. [Online]. Available: https://poorvucenter.yale.edu/Peer-Rev-Teaching [5] D. Kember, and D. Y. P. Leung, "Examining the reliability and validity of the
entrepreneurship among students at all? case study of an educational cross functional hackathon,” in Understanding the Digital Transformation of Socio-Economic-Technological Systems: Dedicated to the 120th Anniversary of Economic Education at Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University, pp. 31–47, Springer, 2024.[3] C. Steglich, L. Salerno, T. Fernandes, S. Marczak, A. Dutra, A. P. Bacelo, and C. Trindade, “Hackathons as a pedagogical strategy to engage students to learn and to adopt software engineering practices,” in Proceedings of the XXXIV Brazilian Symposium on Software Engineering, pp. 670–679, 2020.[4] K. Oyetade, T. Zuva, and A. Harmse, “Evaluation of the impact of hackathons in education,” Cogent Education, vol
Paper ID #48647Empathy: Developing This Core Leadership Skill in Engineering StudentsMr. Seth C. Sullivan, Texas A&M University Seth Sullivan is the Director of the Zachry Leadership Program in the College of Engineering at Texas A&M University. Prior to joining the university, he worked in consulting in the private sector and as an analyst in the U.S. Government. Heˆa C™s earnedMs. Maria PolyzoiSheila RiveraRachel Elizabeth Rice, Texas A&M UniversityNicholas Aleczander Barrio, Texas A&M University ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2025 Empathy: Developing this Core
wellas peer leader observations. Further investigation into that qualitative data may provide greaterinsight into military student success and persistence.References[1] L. Gafney and P. Varma-Nelson, Peer-Led Team Learning Evaluation, Dissemination, and Institutionalization of a College Level Initiative, Springer Science & Business Media, 2008.[2] S. E. Lewis, "Retention and Reform: An Evaluation of Peer-Led Team Learning," Journal of Chemical Education, vol. 88, no. 6, pp. 703-070, 2011.[3] J. Liou-Mark, A. E. Dreyfuss and L. Younge, "Peer Assisted Learning Workshops in Precalculus: An Approach to Increasing Student Success," Mathematics & Computer Education, vol. 44, no. 3, p. 249, 2010.[4] J. Reisel, M. Jablonski, E
continue using it to enhance student engagement and success.References 1. Litzler, E., & Young, J. (2012). Understanding the risk of attrition for engineering students. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering. 2. Geisinger, B. N., & Raman, D. R. (2013). Why they leave: Understanding student attrition from engineering majors. International Journal of Engineering Education. 3. Sánchez, Y. , Nicholson, N. and Hebbard, M. 2019. Familismo teaching, A Pedagogy for Promoting Student Motivation and College Success, SUNY Press. 4. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (1998). Cooperative learning returns to college. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning. 5. Laal, M. and Ghodsi, S. M
. Neville, N. R. Todd, and Y. Mekawi, “Ignoring race and denying racism: A meta-analysis of the associations between colorblind racial ideology, anti-Blackness, and other variables antithetical to racial justice.,” J. Couns. Psychol., vol. 70, no. 3, pp. 258–275, Apr. 2023, doi: 10.1037/cou0000618.[5] J. Wiggins et al., “Doing academia differently: The creation of a cohort-based postdoctoral scholars program for emerging engineering faculty,” presented at the 2023 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, 2023.[6] S. A. Cobb, A. Boklage, D. Watson, G. Hunt, L. M. Contreras, and M. Borrego, “Social Capital Development Through a Postdoc Future Faculty Program: Community Building and Mentorship,” Innov. High. Educ., Jan. 2025, doi
: 10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3443621.[6] Menekse, M. (2023), Envisioning the future of learning and teaching engineering in theartificial intelligence era: Opportunities and challenges. J Eng Educ, 112:578-582. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20539[7] J. Tharmaseelan, K. Manathunga, S. Reyal, D. Kasthurirathna and T. Thurairasa, "Revisit ofautomated marking techniques for programming assignments", IEEE Global EngineeringEducation Conference EDUCON, vol. 2021-April, 2021
”, which providesnot only an excellent pedagogy resources to educate next generation of engineers on conceptsrelated Industry 4.0., also an outstanding research infrastructure for Smart Manufacturing.AcknowledgementThis work was supported by a subaward from GENEDGE through the Department of Energy GrantNo. DE-MS0000029. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed inthis material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the DOE andGENEDGE.Reference[1] MTConnect® Standard Part 1 - Overview and Protocol, Version 1.3.0, 2014[2] MTConnect®Standard Part 2 –Device Information Model, Version 1.3.1, 2015[3] https://pypi.org/project/requests/[4] https://pypi.org/project/xmltodict/[5] https://pypi.org
won numerous awards including the Felton Jenkins, Jr. Hall of Fame Faculty Award, Class of 1934 Outstanding Innovative Use of Education Technology Award, the Eichholz Faculty Teaching Award, and the British Petroleum Junior Faculty Teaching Excellence Award.Dr. Adjo A Amekudzi-Kennedy, Georgia Institute of Technology Professor Adjo Amekudzi-Kennedyˆa C™s research, teaching and professional activities focus on civil infrastructure decision making to promote sustainable development. She studies complex real-world systems and develops infrastructure decision support systemDr. Robert Benjamin Simon, Georgia Institute of Technology ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2025
., & Cui, L. (2023, January). An Educational Game Using Multiphysics Enriched Mixed Reality for Integrated Geotechnical Engineering Education. In 2023 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition.[5] Huang, C., Cai, W., Cui, L., Zhu, C., & Tang, Y. (2023, October). Enhancing Geotechnical Engineering Education Based on Multiphysics Enriched Mixed Reality Game. In 2023 Fall Mid Atlantic Conference: Meeting our students where they are and getting them where they need to be.[6] Huang, C., Cai, W., Zhu, C., Tang, Y., Bauer, S., Wang, L., & Hare, R. (2023). Development of Multiphysics Enriched Mixed Reality Game for Geotechnical Engineering Education. In Geo-Congress 2023 (pp. 526-534
://doi.org/10.1145/3626252.3630763[2] S.M. James and S. R. Singer, "From the NSF: The National Science Foundation’s investments in broadening participation in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education through research and capacity building," CBE—Life Sciences Education, vol. 15, no. 3, article fe7, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.16-01-0059[3] National Science Board (NSB), National Science Foundation, Higher Education in Science and Engineering. Science and Engineering Indicators 2024 (Indicators 2024), NSB- 2023-32, Alexandria, VA, 2023. Available at https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsb202332/[4] E. Seymour and A.-B. Hunter (Eds.), Talking About Leaving Revisited: Persistence, Relocation, and
] National Research Council, Next Generation Science Standards: For States, By States, TheNational Academies Press, 2013. doi: 10.17226/18290.[11] C. Xie, P. Song, and H. Hu, "Measuring Teacher Leadership in Different Domains ofPractice: Development and Validation of the Teacher Leadership Scale," Asia-Pac. Educ. Res.,vol. 30, no. 5, pp. 409–419, 2021. doi: 10.1007/S40299-020-00527-9.[12] K. N. Hayes, C. S. Lee, R. DiStefano, D. O’Connor, and J. C. Seitz, "Measuring ScienceInstructional Practice: A Survey Tool for the Age of NGSS," J. Sci. Teach. Educ., vol. 27, no. 2,pp. 137–164, 2016. doi: 10.1007/S10972-016-9448-5.
being more deeply rooted than others.The feedback in Samples 1, 3, and 5, with scores ranging from 3.80 to 4.90, is somewhatrooted in the drafts, with some different limitations. Sample 1’s feedback engages with thecontent by mentioning the author’s name, career goal, and resources, yet overlooks revisionsand omits comments on some headings. The feedback in Samples 3 and 5 incorrectlycomments on the need for headings already present, with Sample 5 repeatedly making thiserror and generating feedback despite no revisions. In addition, Sample 2, which has thelowest score in this category (2.33), indicates that the feedback is inconsistently rootedbecause it does not mention the author’s name and fails to comment on missing headings, yetit
, 2024.[6] E. J. Kameenui and D. W. Carnine, Effective Teaching Strategies That Accommodate Diverse Learners. Des Moines, IA: Prentice-Hall Inc., 1998.[7] K. T. Lindner and S. Schwab, “Differentiation and individualisation in inclusive education: A systematic review and narrative synthesis,” International Journal of Inclusive Education, pp. 1–21, 2020.[8] K. J. Topping, “Trends in peer learning,” Educational Psychology, vol. 25, no. 6, pp. 631– 645, 2005.
literate engineer: Infusing information literacy skills throughout an engineering curriculum,” in Proceedings of the 2006 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition, Chicago, IL: ASEE, 2006.[6] T. Andrews and R. Patil, “Information literacy for first-year students: an embedded curriculum approach,” European Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 253– 259, Jun. 2007, doi: 10.1080/03043790701276205.[7] A. J. Carroll, S. J. Hallman, K. A. Umstead, J. McCall, and A. J. DiMeo, “Using information literacy to teach medical entrepreneurship and health care economics,” jmla, vol. 107, no. 2, Apr. 2019, doi: 10.5195/jmla.2019.577.[8] J. M. Williamson, N. Rice, C. Tenopir, J. Kaufman, C. J
participants’ social networks aroundteaching and learning. We will also identify how these different roles relate to the 5C Model ofCapacity. Finally, we will conduct a third batch of interviews to bring in perspectives not yetrepresented in our data (e.g., staff and graduate students that contribute to student success.)Insights from these interviews will allow us to draft a SNA instrument that enables the project’sremaining two phases of work.AcknowledgementsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No.2315532. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this materialare those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National
. Northwood. "Hands-on experiences in engineering classes: the need, the implementation and the results." World Trans. on Engng. and Technol. Educ 15, no. 1 (2017): 12-18.8. Goodwin, Graham C., Adrian M. Medioli, Willy Sher, Ljubo B. Vlacic, and James S. Welsh. "Emulation-based virtual laboratories: A low-cost alternative to physical experiments in control engineering education." IEEE Transactions on Education 54, no. 1 (2010): 48-55.9. Diana Restifo. 2021. “Best Free Virtual Labs.” TechLearningMagazine. July 21, 2021. https://www.techlearning.com/news/best-free-virtual-labs.10. Bongiovanni, Emily. n.d. “Library Guides: Open Educational Resources: Simulations and Virtual Labs.” Libguides.mines.edu. https://libguides.mines.edu/oer
material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarilyreflect the views of the National Science Foundation.References[1] W. C. Lee, J. L. Hall, M. Josiam, and C. M. Pee, “(Un)equal demands and opportunities: Conceptualizing student navigation in undergraduate engineering programs,” J. Eng. Educ., vol. 112, no. 4, p. jee.20543, Jun. 2023, doi: 10.1002/jee.20543.[2] M. Ong, N. Jaumot-Pascual, and L. T. Ko, “Research literature on women of color in undergraduate engineering education: A systematic thematic synthesis,” J. Eng. Educ., vol. 109, no. 3, pp. 581–615, 2020, doi: 10.1002/jee.20345.[3] J. M. Smith and J. C. Lucena, “How Do I Show Them I’m More Than A Person Who Can Lift Heavy Things?’ The Funds Of Knowledge Of Low
necessarily reflect the views ofthe National Science Foundation.References[1] G. Miller, H.M. Jerónimo, Q. Zhu, Editors’ Introduction to Thinking through Science andTechnology: Philosophy, Religion, and Politics in an Engineered World, edited by Miller,Jerónimo, and Zhu, 1–10. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2023.[2] C.E. Harris, S. Pritchard, J. Ray, E.E. Eanglehardt, M.J. Rabins, Engineering Ethics – Conceptsand Cases, Sixth Edition, Cengage, Boston, MA, USA, 2019.[3] S.J. Bird, A. Briggle, “Research Ethics.” Ethics, Science, Technology, and Engineering: AGlobal Resource, edited by J. B. Holbrook, 2nd ed., vol. 3, Macmillan Reference USA, 2015, pp.584-592.[4] D.H. Guston, T. Kowall, “Research Integrity.” Ethics, Science, Technology, and
recommendations expressed in this materialare those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National ScienceFoundation.We would like to thank all of the student co-creators in the Fall 2023 and Spring 2025 pilotsemesters for their support and continued feedback. We would also like to extend our gratitudeand thanks to the Iron Range Engineering Program at Minnesota State Mankato. Thank you tothe administrators, faculty, staff, and students who met with our team and shared theirexperiences.References[1] Elizabethtown News. https://news.etown.edu/index.php/2022/09/07/elizabethtown-college- awarded-1-2-million-grant-for-center-for-sustainability-and-equity-in-engineering/ (Accessed Dec. 15, 2024). 2022.[2] K. M. DeGoede, B
participation? How does this vary by unit of analysis from individuals to departments to engineering colleges and institutions?These research questions will be evaluated in a variety of ways, including administratorinterviews, faculty focus groups, and meeting notes/journal analysis. Additionally, deans and/orrepresentatives from 20+ schools across the US have agreed to serve on an Evaluation Board tohelp evaluate project goals.Acknowledgements and DisclaimerThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under AwardNos. 2044199 and 2417098). Any opinions, findings and conclusions or recommendationsexpressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views ofthe National
, groups may welcome and enable criticalconversations, which could result in more inclusive teams and diversity of thought andinnovation AcknowledgementsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under GrantNumbers 2346868 and 2144698. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendationsexpressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views ofthe National Science Foundation. We would like to express gratitude to the research groups whoparticipated in this study and for their willingness to open their meetings to us and providefeedback on the initial drafts of this paper. Finally, we would like to thank the members of theENLITE
Native Americans pursuing careers in STEM: ‘You don’t just take,you give something back,’” Intersections, Vol. 3, no. 1, Art. 4, 2019. [4] C. Bartlett, M. Marshall, and A. Marshall, “Two-eyed seeing and other lessonslearned within a co-learning journey of bringing together indigenous and mainstreamknowledges and ways of knowing,” Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Vol. 2, pp.331-340, 2012. [5] L. A. Broadhead, and S. Howard, “Confronting the contradictions between Westernand Indigenous science: A critical perspective on Two-Eyed Seeing,” AlterNative, Vol. 17, no. 1,pp. 111-119, 2021. [6] D. Harper, “Talking about pictures: A case for photo elicitation,” Visual Studies, Vol.17, no. 1, pp. 13-26, 2002. [7] N
Conference & Exposition, pp. 23-1045. 2013.[4] Jaksic, Nebojsa I. "New Inexpensive 3-D Printers Open Doors to Novel Experiential Learning Practices in Engineering Education." In 2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, pp. 24-932. 2014.[5] Meyers, Kerry L., Andrew S. Morgan, and Brett P. Conner. "3D printing to introduce design in a cornerstone project." Global Journal of Engineering Education 18, no. 1 (2016).
enhances engagement but also nurtures the formation of a robust engineeringidentity, ultimately contributing to more confident and competent future engineers.Acknowledgements :This work was supported through funding by the National Science Foundation (Awards No.2138019, No. 2138106 and No. 2514040). 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.
Teamwork (e.g. leading, planning, contributing) (SO5) 8.5 + 1.7 Planning & conducting testing & analysis (SO6) 8.0 + 1.5 Learning & applying new information independently (SO7) 8.6 + 1.4 Average grades for overall course performance, final project reports, and peer evaluationsfor students in Capstone 1 and Capstone 2 are shown in Table III.2 for graduating classes from2020-2024. Each class enrolled 30-40 students. In the “Sem.” column, a prefix F indicates a fallsemester, while S indicates a spring semester. There is a marked increase in course and reportgrades from Capstone 1 to Capstone 2 for nearly every class, while peer evaluation averages arein the
in courses and curricula ontheir own campuses. The paper originally was submitted in January 2025. In revising, we haveadded an Appendix that discusses conditions in April 2025, which represent an abrupt change innational conditions related to DEIJ topics as compared to Fall 2024 when the teaching activitieswere conducted.IntroductionEngineering programs continue to adapt to changing stakeholder demands for better integrationof diversity, equity, inclusion, and justice (DEIJ) into both classrooms and curricula. Forexample, ABET’s approved new Criterion 5 will require programs to offer curricula “thatensure[s] awareness of diversity, equity, and inclusion for professional practice consistent withthe institution’s mission” [1] (note that this
2-year and 4-year degree programs to address this skilled employeeshortage.Bibliography 1. Li, L. “Reskilling and Upskilling the Future-ready Workforce for Industry 4.0 and Beyond”. Inf Syst Front (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-022-10308-y 2. Acerbi F, Rossi M and Terzi S (2022). Identifying and assessing the required I4.0 skills for manufacturing companies' workforce. Frontiers in Manufacturing Technology, (2):921445. Doi: 10.3389/fmtec.2022.921445 3. Barger, M, Gilbert, R; Centonze, P; Ajlani, Sam; What’s Next? The Future of Work for Manufacturing Technicians, 2021 ASEE Annual Conference Proceedings (Virtual) (https://peer.asee.org/38053) 4. National Science Foundation Advanced Technological