Paper ID #37179Fostering Community at the Graduate Level: One University’s Student-ledApproachHaroula M. Tzamaras, Pennsylvania State University Haroula is a 3rd year PhD candidate studying human factors at Penn State and is the current president of GradWIE.Sierra HicksGabriella M. Sallai, Pennsylvania State University Gaby Sallai is currently a graduate student in the Mechanical Engineering department at Penn State. She is working under Dr. Catherine Berdanier in the Engineering Cognitive Research Laboratory (ECRL) studying the experiences of engineering graduate students. She received her Bachelor’s degree from
link these surveystogether. As a result, the student’s identity is not known, but the pre/post surveys can be linkedfor the same student. Three instruments (1-3, below) comprised the survey and tookapproximately 5-10 minutes to complete. Each section of the survey provided data tooperationalize study variables identified in the PEERSIST model (Fig. 1), namely, engineeringself-efficacy, engineering identity, institutional identity, and supports and barriers.(1) Engineering Self-Efficacy Beliefs. Three items comprised this variable, adapted for this studyfrom Lent et al. [19]: confidence to (1) pass all remaining technical courses in the engineeringmajor, (2) pass all remaining design courses in the engineering major, and (3) graduate with
?”; and coping and help-seeking behaviors (six questions), for example, “What resourcesand support are there on campus or in your department for students who are stressed?”.Participants were asked to describe any interactions with other students and faculty regardingmental health issues and to share any other additional information about engineering-relatedstress. The interview protocol was developed from the results of a quantitative surveyadministered at the same institution in the fall of 2017, which included metrics of stress, anxiety,depression, inclusion, and engineering identity, as well as an open-ended response opportunityfor participants to share additional thoughts [8]. The interview was piloted with three participantsexternal to the
Formation (PFE: RIEF) program under Award#2024960. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in thismaterial are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NationalScience Foundation.References[1] Patrick, Anita D., and A. N. Prybutok. "Predicting persistence in engineering through anengineering identity scale." International journal of engineering education 34, no. 2a (2018).[2] Marra, Rose M., and Barbara Bogue. "Women engineering students' self efficacy--alongitudinal multi-institution study." Women in Engineering ProActive Network (2006). Surveyavailable at http://aweonline.org/efficacy.html[3] Bilgin, Betul, James W. Pellegrino, and Vikas Berry. "Work-in-Progress: The Design of Up-to-Date
learning30 and co-generation.31 The students receive researcher’s expert opinion,which provides the benefits of cognitive apprenticeship.21In each iteration, two separate groups of students work toward building two identical robots. Forone group, the teacher and researcher use traditional qualitative observation, brainstorming,discussion, questionnaire, and feedback methods to analyze the outcomes of the iteration.7,8 Forthe second group, in addition to the traditional methods, the teacher and researcher follow someadvanced systems engineering approaches under the cognitive apprenticeship of the expertresearcher. The DBR is treated as a continuous improvement (CI) method,32 and resembles as theDeming or Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) cycle.33 The teacher
collected during this study were both qualitative and quantitative, making this a mixedmethods study. The data we collected to extract creativity were mainly qualitative. Though therewere 11 instruments in total that we could use to extract data, and 13 graduate engineering studentsparticipating in the study (in 5 groups: G1 to G5), we had only nine complete sets for all 11instruments. As a result, we used a critical case study approach for our analysis.RQ1: How do engineering students perceive the importance of creativity in their leadershipdevelopment before and after creativity instruction?To answer our first research question, we examined the pre-course questionnaire and comparedthe participants’ ratings and reasons with their post-course self
. Bork and J.-L. Mondisa, “Engineering graduate students’ mental health: A scoping literature review,” Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 111, no. 3, pp. 665–702, 2022, doi: 10.1002/jee.20465.[13] Council of Graduate Schools, “Completion and Attrition in STEM Master’s Programs: Pilot Study Findings.” Council of Graduate Schools, 2013.[14] G. C. Fleming et al., “The fallacy of ‘there are no candidates’: Institutional pathways of Black/African American and Hispanic/Latino doctorate earners,” Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 112, no. 1, pp. 170–194, 2023, doi: 10.1002/jee.20491.[15] E. Hocker, E. Zerbe, and C. G. P. Berdanier, “Characterizing Doctoral Engineering Student Socialization: Narratives of Mental Health
. After each lesson and after thelesson series, students completed a written reflection on what they had learned, totaling to fivereflections over the semester. Their responses will be explored with a thematic qualitativeanalysis to answer the research questions above. The lessons continue to be adapted to thiscontext and are being taught to all sections of the course this semester. A rollout to all incomingfirst-year engineering students is planned for the Fall of 2023, so this analysis is ongoing, and allconclusions drawn so far are from Fall of 2022 and are denoted as a WIP.Definition of EmpathyDuring a pilot study in the Fall of 2022, 59 first-year students in the honors sections of“Introduction to Engineering” at a large R1 university
Leadership Program, Fish Aides, Horizons Consulting Guild, and Engineering Honors. Upon graduation, Kiersten hopes to use her internship, study abroad, and organization experience to pursue a career in the energy sector. Having grown up abroad, she hopes to live internationally again sometime in the future.Jiacheng LuLori L. Moore, Texas A&M University Dr. Lori Moore is an Associate Professor in the Department of Agricultural Leadership, Education, and Communications at Texas A&M University. Dr. Moore teaches introductory leadership, leadership the- ory, adult education, and methods of teaching courses and supervises students completing their supervised American
the results of the student learning would be a significant contribution tothese programs, emerging programs and to industry.Industry has been calling for leadership skills for decades, although not always labeling them assuch. A study by the National Society for Professional Engineers (NSPE) in the 1990s identifiedwhat industry valued in graduating engineers and how well they perceived engineering schoolswere doing at educating students in those areas. [28] At the ABET Symposium in April 2015, apanel of industry representatives identified the primary characteristics they sought in newengineering graduates. [29] In addition, the Engineering Accreditation Commission (EAC) ofABET has identified several skills that engineering graduates must
Paper ID #12803Comparing Disparate Outcome Measures for Better Understanding of Engi-neering GraduatesMs. Samantha Ruth Brunhaver, Arizona State University Samantha Brunhaver is an Assistant Professor of Engineering in the Fulton Schools of Engineering Poly- technic School. She completed her graduate work in Mechanical Engineering at Stanford University. She also has a B.S. in Mechanical Engineering from Northeastern University. Her research examines the career decision-making and professional identity formation of engineering students, alumni, and prac- ticing engineers. She also conducts studies of new engineering
entrepreneurship, and women and leadership courses and initiatives at both the undergraduate and graduate levels. Prior to her work in academia, Nathalie spent several years in the field of market research and business strategy consulting in Europe and the United States with Booz Allen and Hamilton and Data and Strategies Group. She received a BA from the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, an MBA from Babson College, and MS and PhD degrees from Purdue University. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019 Communicating the Value of a Transdisciplinary Degree: Comparing and Contrasting Perceptions Across Student GroupsAbstractMultidisciplinary, interdisciplinary, and
], many universities and colleges have sought to introduceglobal programming to engineering as part of extracurricular or formal programming. Many ofthese are framed around global study abroad experiences, with scholars noting that even short-term experiences can lead to heightened understandings of globalization and cultural awareness[37]-[39]. However, the continuous limitations of privilege, cost, and time additions on degreecompletion continue to be evident, and rarely have extended to graduate student populations (withthe exception of a few instances noted in literature via NSF IGERT programs and similar, such asthe study performed by Berdanier et al. [40]). Literature documenting these programs also considerwhether and how intercultural
mathematics principles to real-world (engineering) applications, helping secondarystudents understand the importance of a college education, and providing hands-on science andengineering activities.Both Fellows and volunteer undergraduate student tutorsi assist secondary students withhomework, improving study skills, and standardized tests and examinations preparation. Summerscience experiences and academic year activities for teachers offer opportunities to work onengineering research projects with university faculty. Parents are gaining “College Knowledge”through a model Professional Learning Communities / Critical Friends Group format. The modelis designed to be exportable nationwide.This paper focuses on the involvement of university graduate and
under preparation for a detailed discussionof these results.7 Summary of Findings to Date and Future WorkIn summary, PLP is an open project that adapts to the needs of computer engineering educationand is designed to actively engage students in the learning process. PLP was created to connectcore concepts learned in various computer engineering courses, and is aimed at improving thelearning experience for students. It is grounded in the theories of social constructionism andsituated cognition. Results from the pilot studies show that PLP is highly effective in engagingstudents and in helping them gain valuable skills. One clear advantage we are beginning to see isthat students, instructors, and teaching assistants all found it very convenient
Surveys B and D at the end of each semester for the next fivesemesters. Statistical analyses similar to those performed for Cohort 2024 will be conducted forCohort 2025. Additionally, the availability of data from both cohorts will allow us to comparetheir outcomes at corresponding points in time. A key distinction in the experimental setupbetween Cohorts 2024 and 2025 is that Cohort 2024 did not have access to the engineeringworkshop during their first semester, whereas Cohort 2025 will have access from the outset.Works Cited[1] N. A. Mamaril, E. L. Usher, C. Li, D. R. Economy and M. S. Kennedy, "Measuring undergraduate students' engineering self-efficacy: A validation study," Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 105, no. 2, p. 366–395
and Clinical Psychology, 29(10), 1074–1099. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.2010.29.10.1074Torka, M. (2020). Change and continuity in Australian doctoral education: PhD completion rates and times (2005-2018). The Australian Universities’ Review, 62(2), 69–82.Watkins, S. E., & McGowan, B. L. (2022). Black men doctoral scientists and engineers persisting: Peer support and racism in science and engineering. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 59(10), 1853-1875.Weidman, J. C., Twale, D. J., & Stein, E. L. (2001). Socialization of graduate and professional students in higher education: A perilous passage? Jossey-Bass and ERIC Clearinghouse on Higher Education, Association for the Study of Higher Education
discussion matter including study skills, stress management, study abroad opportunities,and time management. As seen through both academic results (GPA, % honors, % probation, %transfers) and quantitative survey results, the program has been demonstrated to have a positiveeffect and has been lauded as a major success [6]. Page 25.678.3Similarly, the Graduate, Undergraduate Initiative for Development and Enhancement (GUIDE)program at Michigan Technological University groups entering 1st year engineering studentswith a sophomore, junior, or senior student as well as a graduate student mentor. Together, thesegroups of 3 are required to attend weekly
Engineering Education at Purdue University. Her research focuses what factors influence diverse students to choose engineering and stay in engineering through their careers and how different experiences within the practice and culture of engineering foster or hinder belongingness and identity development. Dr. Godwin graduated from Clemson University with a B.S. in Chemical Engineering and Ph.D. in Engineering and Science Education. She is the recipient of a 2014 American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) Educational Research and Methods Di- vision Apprentice Faculty Grant. She has also been recognized for the synergy of research and teaching as an invited participant of the 2016 National Academy of Engineering
social factors that have impacted the construction ofGES's academic identities. However, broader efforts are needed to understand the population ofengineering graduate students with a strong engineering focus at universities. This Work inProgress study presents the results of a pilot survey developed that seeks to understand thefactors that impact the well-being of international and domestic graduate engineering students.For this, we selected a survey that evaluates this population's social resources. The socialresources component assesses social and institutional support, their relationships with advisors,institutional support, and networking capacities. In addition to the dimensions mentioned earlier,we included the PERMA-profiler (Positive
information7. A successful program, cognizant of thissituation, could implement interdisciplinary studies programs that combined, forexample, technology development and ecology, to help students make connections andsee relevancy and meaning in what they are studying, while fulfilling general educationor distribution requirements. Similarly, capstone experiences can be tailored to bothallow synthesis of learning across the four years as well as providing professional skills(i.e., resumes, interviewing, financial planning skills, etc.) that will help them succeedpost-graduation. Page 11.365.7 As discussed below, both the instructional format for each
the potential ofthis approach for increasing (1) learners’ capacities to engage in both far transfer (innovation)and direct application (efficiency) and (2) the formation of STEM identity. This new study willuse a mixed methods approach, including a quasi-experimental research design incorporatingboth quantitative and qualitative data analytic methods. A combination of measures includingstandards-based science unit tests, existing district student and administrative data sources,student pre-post surveys, and a preparation for future learning (PFL) assessment tool.VI. ConclusionsWe have applied the theory of Imaginative Education to develop Through My Window, atransmedia learning environment for engineering education. Evidence indicates that
[24]. We believe that this is why Community Involvement, as a supporting object[24] emerged so strongly at different times through scholars’ processes. We theorize that findinga new domain with a supporting community – a home – was crucial for their continuation andsuccess in EER.The feeling of homelessness was a central theme observed in the results of an autoethnographyconducted by the third author [6]. This research was based on McAlpine et al.’s identity-trajectory network framework [25], and unlike our pilot study, which focused on internationallysuccessful academics, their study focused on graduate students studying engineering educationresearch in Canada. The themes in Seniuk Cicek et al.’s [6] study not only resonate with thestruggles
accepted to fill out the survey and 93 eventually completed it (completion rate = 29.5%).III. Survey distributionThe survey was emailed by the College of Engineering at our institution to all the undergraduate(and some graduate) students enrolled in engineering courses in the summer 2020 semester. Theinvitation email for the survey was sent at the end of the summer semester, followed by the firstand the second reminders with a gap of four days between each.ResultsThe accuracy of this survey was ensured by getting it reviewed by an external researcher and byconducting a small-scale pilot test before sending it to the engineering population for large-scaletesting.I. Survey TestingStep 1: External review – The survey was sent for review to an
Paper ID #40727An Ecosystem of Support Initiatives for BIPOC, Women, and DomesticGraduate Students in STEMDr. Andrew Edmunds, Clemson University Dr. Edmunds is a Coordinator for Graduate Recruitment and Inclusive Excellence in the College of Engi- neering, Computing, and Applied Sciences at Clemson University. With more than 10 year of experience supporting both graduate and undergraduate students in engineering his research focuses on sense-of- belonging, part-time graduate students, and the future of land grant universities.Dr. Melissa Smith, Clemson University ©American Society for Engineering
Shore. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 Envisioning Equitable Pathways to STEM Graduate Education: Creating a Coalition including two public HBCUs and a public Research 1 University to Make It HappenAbstractTwo public HBCUs and a public Research 1 University established a coalition to developpathways to STEM M.S. and Ph.D. programs among Black, Latinx, and Native Americanstudents. Through a mixed-methods research project, the team: (1) identified Faculty Championsto support and advocate for the students; (2) developed a Memorandum of Understanding forSTEM programs between the institutions to facilitate sustained effort by our coalition; and (3)identified Pilot
Paper ID #40784Self-Advocacy Professional Programming as a Framework to SupportNon-Academic Outcomes of STEM PhD Graduate EducationProf. Carmen Maria Lilley, The University of Illinois at Chicago Dr. Lilley’s research interests in engineering education focus on professional development of engineering students at the undergraduate and graduate level. She is interested in studying the effects of the intersection of gender and race/ethnicity on the professional formation of engineers and how institutions of higher education can transform to support student’s sense of belonging. ©American Society
humanitarian engineering topics in research. Currently, she is investigating the connections between humanitarian engineering projects, professional formation, and views of diversity and inclusion.Courtney Deckard, Lipscomb UniversityHannah Duke, Lipscomb University Hannah Duke is an undergraduate student in the Raymond B. Jones College of Engineering at Lipscomb University. Hannah is studying mechanical engineering and plans to continue on to graduate school, following the completion of her undergraduate degree, to get a master’s degree in Architectural Design. She is currently researching the effects of humanitarian engineering projects on views of diversity and inclusion and professional development.Makenzie CohnNatalie
avoidance, and masculinity. A semi-structured interview is beingconducted in order to understand how engineering students define their disciplinary engineeringculture using Hofstede’s dimensions as the guide.An initial interview protocol was developed based on the answers that students provided in thequantitative study, the information collected on the systematic review of the literature, and alsoinformed by theory proposed by Bradbeer [51] and Nulty and Barrett [52]. The initial protocolwas piloted with 2 graduate students. Revisions were made and a pilot study was conducted were5 undergraduate electrical and computer engineering students were interviewed for one hour. Thepreliminary results were analyzed using the qualitative data analysis
. Chu, Ed. Singapore: Springer, 2020, pp. 31–45.[13] C. P. Maertz Jr, P. A. Stoeberl, and J. Marks, “Building successful internships: lessons from the research for interns, schools, and employers,” Career Development International, 2014.[14] D. Bishop, C. Justice, and E. Fernandez, “The perceived impact of information technology experiential learning on career success: A pilot study,” 2015.[15] S. Rathbun-Grubb, “End of program assessments and their association with early career success in LIS,” Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, vol. 57, no. 1, pp. 43–56, 2016.[16] I. Inceoglu, E. Selenko, A. McDowall, and S. Schlachter, “(How) Do work placements work? Scrutinizing the quantitative