engineeringstudents with ASD that offers peer mentoring to help with the transition to and engagement incollege life. The mentors offer guidance in honing executive functioning skills, identifyingessential resources, fostering social connections, developing self-advocacy skills, and effectivelynavigating the campus environment. Through an undergraduate research initiative, undergraduateengineering researchers have immersed themselves into this program, conducted research onneurodiverse learning and communication skills, and developed a prototype applicationspecifically for the peer mentoring program. Initially the student researchers developed surveysto determine the needs and interests in a customized application. Using the survey results, theydeveloped a
culturaldimensions as they pertain to UI features (e.g., content, organization, navigation, verbal rhetoric,tone, design) in two websites that are produced by the same company for two different countries[11] - [12]. Students seek to assess how effective the sites are in meeting their audiences’ needs.They write a draft report to the hypothetical Marketing Director of the company website thatthey chose (this report is not sent out), conduct a peer review of other students’ draft reports,revise and finalize their own report, and create and present an oral presentation to their peers.This report assignment involves active, collaborative, problem-based learning [13]. The reportassignment counts for 20 percent of the final grade and is holistically graded with
, to support the needs of our engineering students.Fig. 8. GRIC Library services supporting the research lifecycle.Since communication skills in English are fundamental to succeed in STEM fields, especially forEnglish as Second Language students, the GRIC has also integrated peer-to-peer support with ateam of Graduate Writing Facilitators (GWF). The GWF’s are a team of three graduate studentswith diverse multidisciplinary backgrounds (Engineering, Science, and English), trained to offeracademic services in oral and written communication in English to meet the needs of all ourgraduate programs. Through writing clinics (e.g., English grammar and style, tone and audience,visual design, transition and clarity, and oral presentations in general
discussionsto write rules and norms for their teams helps to raise awareness in students of these issues. Theresults show a positive impact of the introduced interventions, especially around teamwork andcollaboration with peers. The results offer insights on how we can continue this study and followthe cohort of students through time to see if the impact lasts beyond the first year.Pre-/Post-survey data ResultsResults from comparing the pre- and post-survey results are shown in Table 2. A value of 1indicates No Agreement and 7 indicates Strongly Agree. There was no significant difference inthe survey results for Question 1 either from the beginning to the end of Fall 2020 or between theend of Fall 2019 and Fall 2020. When comparing Fall 2019 (no
capture any change in their most 18 minutes Belbin test preferred/manageable/least preferred roles after the learning sessions and the activity Coursework: N/A Reflective Final course assessment: To capture their 15 days Self-reflection writing (up to leadership journey through the course. 15 pages) Post-coursework 2 6 Peer review: to capture peer feedback and 10 minutes peer feedback the ability to give constructive feedback. Post-coursework N/A
research sources from prior classes, but also knew this might be a newerskill for most. Consequently, the teaching team provided students with a brief guide reviewinghow to search library databases and find relevant literature.After first-round submissions had been turned in, students were tasked with writing peer reviewsof the submissions of other teams. Several reasons were given to them for this, including theopportunity to see more examples of bias and a variety of ways of presenting information, aswell as practice with providing helpful feedback to others. Students were given the opportunityto revise and resubmit their conceptual models based on peer feedback.Intervention phase 2: Proposing a new design/research to create valueThe next phase
Students grouped by math placement, Common first-year courses, and access to Peer Mentoring and Academic Coaches Learning Communities Engineering fraternity/STEM sorority Collaborative Assignments and Projects Open-ended, real-world, class-based projects Undergraduate Research Honors Research and Innovation Experience and Symposium Diversity/Global Learning Project-based learning and Drill seminars ePortfolios Honors Research Experience Course Internships Drill seminarsHIPs not in FEP (Capstone, Writing Intensive Courses and Service Learning) have been excluded from Table
curriculum design and pilot efforts of a short module in theintroductory bioengineering course [4-5].Course OverviewThe introductory bioengineering course aims to provide broad exposure to several areas ofresearch in bioengineering such as cancer diagnostics, medical device development, regenerativemedicine, global health, and synthetic biology. The course emphasizes critical reading ofscientific literature and technical writing, and broadly covers the engineering design process,creative problem-solving techniques, engineering ethics, social constraints, and other designprinciples.The first offering of the honors section was a 2-credit add-on to the introductory bioengineeringcourse. The honors section was comprised of 12 students who were
2(16Students) 5 6 Figure 1: Implementation Timeline for the FSSP and S-STEM Programs2.2. Freshman SSTEM Scholars Program (FSSP) StructureGoals of FSSPThe main goals of the program are: enhanced retention of URM students, the development ofstrong URM candidates for admission into the S-STEM program, and to build interest in studentsfor the pursuit of graduate study. Enhanced retention of URM students is critical as 2014 datafrom the National Center for Education statistics 15 describes African American and Hispanicstudents as 23.6% and 12.7% less likely, respectively, to finish college after 5 years as comparedto their white peers. Retention is encouraged
diversity.4 The program consists of five classes,unique to the minor, that span across two academic years (4 semesters) and relies on the use ofcohort-based program structure, near-peer mentoring, and project-driven learning. The cohortstructure allows for close relationships to form, combatting the social isolation that historicallymarginalized students may feel in CS classes. Peer mentoring benefits students by offeringfurther academic, social, and professional development support within the program. Project-based learning provides strong ties to students’ major area(s) of study (primarily biology andbiochemistry) and supports students’ future success in fields that are becoming increasingly data-driven.1 Finally, the minor program courses focus
student teams. Interrogating theinteractions African-American males experience within multiracial teams enhances ourunderstanding of how they experience engineering and what peer interactions reduce spotlightingand disconnection. Page 26.1545.2IntroductionTeam projects in undergraduate engineering programs are critical sites for professional skillsdevelopment. Designed to simulate engineering work, team projects allow students to try onprofessional roles as they interact with peers and faculty. Also, engaging in engineering activitiessuch as a team project can help students establish a sense of identity within their field, which inturn influences
Paper ID #18296Stepping out of the Comfort Zone - and the Country: Facilitating In-DepthStudent Learning through Nontraditional Communication AssignmentsMr. David Bowles, Louisiana State University David ”Boz” Bowles is a technical communication instructor and Engineering Communication Studio coordinator in the Chevron Center for Engineering Education at Louisiana State University. He earned a baccalaureate degree in English and a Master of Fine Arts in Creative Writing from Virginia Common- wealth University.Ms. Paige Davis, Louisiana State University Paige Davis has 22 years of experience in the College of Engineering at
rate, and graduation time needed are significantly better compared totheir peers. This study shows that, the scholarships and various academic supports provided tothe talented but financially needy minority students had significant impact on student success,retention, and graduation.1. IntroductionIn an increasingly competitive and technology driven global economy, the future prosperity ofU.S. to succeed depends in a large measure on a STEM educated workforce. During the nextdecade, U.S. demand for scientists and engineers is expected to increase four times compared toother occupations [1],[2]. Yet, only 32% of undergraduates in the U.S. receive their degrees inSTEM while the corresponding figures for Japan, China, and Germany are 55%, 59
of team based collaborative learning. In addition to theshort-term knowledge gain acquired through peer instruction, we also measured long-termretention of final exam material four months’ post-final. On both the final exam and the fourmonth post-final retest, students scored significantly higher on material taught through TBL.Thus, team based learning, which includes a combination of reading, writing, kinesthetic andaural methods of learning, demonstrated significant short- and long-term gains in contentretention.BackgroundThe Johns Hopkins University Biomedical Engineering (BME) course Molecules and Cells is amandatory class for BME majors, primarily taught during fall of their sophomore year. Inaddition, approximately ten percent of the
Engineering Education, 2021 Minority Student Experiences in Engineering Graduate Programs: Socialization and Impact on Career TrajectoriesAbstractThis paper examines the academic and social interactions during graduate engineering programenrollment among racially underrepresented doctoral and master’s students and how thoseinteractions shape their career goals. Using socialization theory, this study explored dailyinteractions of students with faculty and peers, overall perceptions of fit, knowledge about thegraduate school process, and opportunities for mentoring provided in the institution as well asthrough outside engagement during industry internships. The findings presented in this paperbuild upon an earlier study conducted
). Page 26.1430.4 Table 1 – Coding scheme description and examples.Domain Category Description Example Refers to writing or presentation of the design “There are grammatical error[s] Communication work. throughout the paper.” Explicitly refers to one of the design concepts Design Concepts taught in class by using terminology taught in “The goal could [be] more specific.” class.Substance Refers
Activity Creation 2 review Peer assessment or review 121 Blended Learning Flipped classroom 89 Flipped ClassroomThe five tool types are directly from Section 21.5 of The Cambridge Handbook of ComputingEducation Research [22]. The tool types are (1) tools that support writing code, (2) games thatteach programming, (3) assessment and feedback tools, (4) code visualizers/simulators, and (5)E-Books.Re-examining motivations and challengesThe survey has been created by the research team but attempted to directly build and possiblyrecreate the findings of Hovey et al. [4]. The options, specifically for benefits and challengesquestions, come
European, Black or African, Hispanic or Latino, Middle Eastern or North African, Asian, Native American, Slavic, or I prefer not to say. • Technical_Talent: Assessed technical skills. Range: Terrible (1) to Wonderful (5). • Learning_Process: Learning style. Range: Visual, Auditory, Reading/Writing, or Kinesthetic. • Learning_Approach: Learning method. Range: Collaborative, Experiential, or Observation. • Early_Adapter: Whether the student tends to adopt new technologies early. Range: Yes or No.The target variable, Test_Group, categorizes students into those who review with AI, review withthe internet, review with a peer, contemplate on their own, or choose any method they like.We then asked a set of 10 to 12
group game design or problem-solving activities.Online students were asked to complete similar activities at home by themselves. Students wereasked to write reflections on the weekly activities. Both in-person students and online studentsparticipate in peer review of work products produced by other students or teams. The creators ofthe works being reviewed classified the reviews as meaningful or not useful. All studentsparticipated in the peer evaluation of the final 2D and 3D game products. A gamification andbadging system were introduced in the revised CIS 487 course. Table 1. The Weekly Topics and Activities for CIS 487 Week Software Engineering Topic Activities 1 Game Design Evaluation
Immerwahr at Villanova University [36] andshown in Table 5 [40]. A copy of this rubric was included in the course syllabus to communicatediscussion expectations to students.All FYS courses at Lafayette College are writing courses, and the St. Martin’s Handbook [41] isused as a secondary text for students learning academic writing skills. They employ a process-writing approach in which students submit first drafts which they then revise after feedback froma peer Writing Associate and the instructor.The first writing assignment, which is given out during the first week of class, asks students toreflect on their own lived experience with semiconductor technology in terms of how they learnand work, communicate with friends and family, and seek
are at piquing the interest of the reviewer! In addition, the WISE@OUsenior STEM faculty offered to review individual URC proposals before they were submittedand provided individualized feedback on the organization, writing and content of the proposals.Following the well-attended workshop as well as the individualized proposal peer-review, thesuccess rate of all STEM assistant professor applicants jumped from 36% in 2012 to 67% in2013 and to 100% in 2014. The impact on women STEM assistant professors in particular washigh as a larger proportion of them had applied for the URC fellowship awards in 2012 yet hadsignificantly lower success rates than their male counterparts. While we realize that thesespecific examples of internal awards may not
develop the skills and writing habits to complete doctorate degrees in engineering. Across all of her research avenues, Dr. Matusovich has been a PI/Co-PI on 12 funded research projects including the NSF CAREER Award with her share of funding be ingnearly $2.3 million. She has co-authored 2 book chapters, 21 journal publications and more than 70 conference papers. She has won several Virginia Tech awards including a Dean’s Award for Outstanding New Faculty, an Outstanding Teacher Award and a Faculty Fellow Award. She holds a B.S. in Chemical Engineering from Cornell University, an M.S. in Materials Science from the University of Connecticut and a Ph.D. in Engineering Education from Purdue University.Dr. Stephanie G
with an interest in renewable energy or sustainability but, typically,little previous coursework in math or science. Each cohort had 8 student peer leaders orTAs, who were committed STEM majors and served as mentors and teaching assistants.The emphasis was on hands-on activities within small teams in a daily four hour labsetting. An important component was built-in time for tinkering and creativity aroundcontextualized assignments. Unlike most college experiences, the desired outcome was toprovoke interest rather than to impart a specific body of knowledge. Participation,exploration and fun were valued over the rigidity often found in STEM instruction. A widerange of approaches were used including; demonstrations, games, hands-on activities
- tor in the Office of Research and Sponsored Projects at The University of Texas at El Paso (UTEP). As manager for the CAHSI INCLUDES Alliance, she works on a national basis to coordinate and motivate regional leads; facilitate CAHSI’s External Advisory Board; and serve as a liaison to CAHSI’s policy team, all so that CAHSI’s 60 partners can collectively realize the Alliance’s vision of Hispanics repre- senting 20% or more of those who earn credentials in computing by the year 2030. In her role in UTEP’s Office of Research and Sponsored Projects, Elizabeth assembles interdisciplinary project teams and em- beds herself within them in order to conceptualize, write, and submit large, institutional grant proposals
studies and professional practice, little has been done tointegrate IL to engineering curriculum.Research Questions:Does intentional information literacy instruction impact the quality of research produced by first-year students? Does the type of intervention make a difference?To operationalize these questions, the level of synthesis, quality of citations, as well as thewriting conventions were examined. The writing convention would be the primary level of IL inthe instruction. Can students use proper formatting and write a foundational piece of research.The quality and quantity of the citations, as well as their level of relation to the topic shows adeeper level of understanding and implementation of the IL instruction. The synthesis level ofthe
the instructors and helping support all thestudents, the assignment of three sub-groups created a clear structure where students had pointsof contact in between sessions, and for subsequent break-out sessions or activities which requiredgroups, it was easy to fall into these mentor groups. It should be noted that all Peer Mentors hadreceived training in the Guaranteed 4.0 Program and were able to check students’ bullet pointnotes and other assignments. In this week, the instructor lectured on the concept of forming goals using the“S.M.A.R.T” technique. Students were tasked with writing down goals for the semester and/oryear, and then reviewing a few ancillary resources online about the acronym of “S.M.A.R.T.”They were then tasked with
American Society for Engineering Education, 2018 Effective Teamwork Dynamics in a Unit Operations Laboratory Course1. IntroductionThe Chemical Engineering Unit Operations Laboratory is a unique course that relies heavily on acooperative team effort for successful learning that leads to a compelling laboratoryexperience[1-3]. In this course, team assignments play a critical role in the performance of agroup because every laboratory session involves peer interactions, hands-on experimentationfrom start to finish, data analysis and discussion, and a significant amount of writing time, i.e., aworkload that is intentionally more than one individual is expected to manage. The dauntingworkload for this course should
practiced at developing objectives and outcomes. The project objectives andlearning outcomes for the summer immersion experience using the LLP methodology follow theprogram objectives and outcomes guidelines set by ABET [5]. Our program objectives andoutcomes are designed to support the overall goal of engaging students through innovativeengineering design and experiential learning.The specific objectives for the workshop are that students will be able to: 1. Conceptualize, analyze, design, implement, and evaluate engineering solutions; 2. Work effectively as a team member; 3. Communicate effectively through speaking, writing, and the use of presentation tools; 4. Adapt to technological changes and innovations to gain efficiencies in cost
Engineering. At LMU, her main research areas are divided along two avenues: (1) numerical simulations of earthquake source physics, which relates to her graduate work, and (2) developing, imple- menting, and assessing the effectiveness of educational interventions that support student persistence in STEM.Ms. Meredith Jane Richter, Loyola Marymount University Meredith Richter is a mechanical engineering undergraduate student at Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles, CA. She is interested in peer-mentoring research because she is a female engineer striving to change the stigma and demographic makeup of STEM disciplines. She is currently involved in her senior design project, which focuses on using additive manufacturing
andcommunities; (2) peer cohorts, providing social support structure for students and enhancingtheir sense of belonging in engineering and computer science classrooms and beyond; and (3)professional development from faculty who have been trained in difference-education theory, sothat they can support students with varying levels of understanding of the antecedents of collegesuccess. To ensure success of these interventions, the CAPS program places great emphasis ondeveloping culturally responsive advisement methods and training faculty mentors to facilitatecreating a culture of culturally adaptive advising. More details of CAPS interventions can befound in [4].CAPS program is a 5-year project that started fall 2018. The program planned to support