to identify student and instructor actions throughout the class meeting. The goal of thisassignment is to reflect on time spent listening versus lecturing, group tasks versus individualtasks, and the overall engagement of the students (Salazar & Martinez Berryhill, 2019). Inaddition to this analysis of classroom instruction, faculty develop an equity index of studentsuccess based on course grades. This assignment requires faculty to review course grade databased on the demographic background of students enrolled in their courses (Salazar & MartinezBerryhill, 2019). Once complete, faculty are asked to reflect on their data to identify possiblegaps in teaching and learning. These assignments along with the strategies for improving
self-reflection about themselvesleads them to fall behind males in STEM fields like computing and engineering in high school[14][16]. According to a study by Riegel-Crumb (2011), children are “ […] aware of how theirskills do or do not match up to external expectations of their academic proficiency in math andscience” [15]. However, external factors can play an important role on students career aspirations[15]. Various reasons have been identified as having impact on female student major and careerchoices both positively and negatively. Students get positive inspiration from role models [17],interaction with teachers [18], and early exposure to STEM [19]. On the other hand, they getnegative influences from gender stereotypes [20], early gender
ininstructional technology and cognitive sciences [1]. This calls for engaging engineeringeducators in an educational reform that facilitates reflection of one’s own current teachingpractices, entwines current knowledge of best educational practices in engineering with mutuallycollaborative solutions, and focuses on building a culture of innovation and continuallearning [3].In the U.S., many universities have set up professional faculty development programs to prepareengineering educators to address the challenges in providing quality education. While theseprogram do a great job of training faculty, only a subset of faculty participation in theseprograms, possibly due to of lack of incentive, time, motivation, and / or awareness about theprogram
assessing student effectiveness during each phase of student development[8], [10]. While these models reflect best practices in team development and consider ways tocreate diverse teams that support underrepresented students, they have not adjusted theirpractices to measure the ways students are or are not making engineering environments moreinclusive. This focus is especially vital as ABET has made explicit changes to its criteria thatmake creating an inclusive teaming environment an essential skill for engineers [12]. In responseto these calls for change, research has begun to understand how engineering teaming experiencescan be more inclusive [13]-[22].Adding to this literature, our research examines how students interact in diverse teams to
thelimitations of simplifying assumptions can affect the prediction (i.e. course calculations vs. realworld measurements).9 - Sonic Flow MeasurementThis exercise uses an engineered piping system to create a contained shock wave. Two pipes areseparated by a flange containing a plastic diaphragm. The first pipe is slowly pressurized untilthe diaphragm is burst and a shock wave is transmitted down the second pipe, then reflected backthrough the system. The second pipe is instrumented with two pressure sensors along the line oftravel, which allows for determination of the pressure rise as well as velocity of the shock wavecorresponding to the initial pass as well as the following reflections. This exercise focuses oncomparing the experimental results to the
, and uncovering students’ ideas.One of the greatest strengths of Garden TOOLS has been the ability to meet the diverse needs andinterests of formal and informal educators working within a variety of situational constraints (i.e. limitedtime, staff availability, access to outdoor spaces, etc.). The pilot PD trainings conducted with manydifferent audiences have provided a wealth of qualitative data in the form of both participants feedbackand facilitator reflection that has been used to identify successes and challenges to the Garden TOOLSprogram and can be used to guide future iterations of PD trainings.Overall, Garden TOOLS PD trainings have received an enthusiastic response from participants with
age of 18 were only 51.5% non-HispanicWhite. These trends show a tremendously changing racial and ethnic make-up of our youngergenerations. From prior years data, we know in 2020, for all children under the age of 18, thenon-Hispanic White population is now the minority population, giving way to the collectivemajority population represented by all children not considered non-Hispanic White.From this perspective, it is clearly the millennial generation that is ushering in the nation’s futurediversity; with Gen Z that follows as the generation to solidify and further define the racial andethnic trend line.The data on changes in 18-34 year-olds from 2000 to 2015, a 15 year window, reflect there was anet loss of nearly one-quarter million white
STEM faculty; and 4) professional advice and career paths. The initial mentoringprogram design was developed through two Lean Six Sigma projects, where they collected voiceof the customer (mentors and mentees) data, and designed the program. The program waspiloted in Fall 2019, spearheaded by the Women Engineering Program in the School ofEngineering, the director and a student graduate assistant. The success of the pilot program wasassessed in three ways: 1) number of mentor/mentee pairs starting the program, compared to theinitial number interested; 2) retention of women in engineering and science during the programperiods; and 3) through mentor and mentee reflections. In the initial voice of customer datacollection, we identified 14 possible
study is reflective of the overall proportion of female students (21%) inthe college of engineering where the study was undertaken. Moreover, we were focused onprioritizing a broad representation of countries in the selection of participants.Data CollectionData were collected using an interview protocol after it was piloted and approved by the IRB.The interview protocol was developed using Vygotsky [8] sociocultural theoretical framework asa reference and enabled us to conduct semi-structured interviews with 10 first-year internationalstudents during the first semester (Fall) of the academic year 2018-2019. The semi-structuredinterviews asked specific questions guided by prompts upon which the richness of the interviewwas heavily dependent [20
disappointing results may simply reflect the length oftime it takes to realize learning outcomes in this area.This work is supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. EEC-1540301. Any opinions, findings,and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarilyreflect the views of the National Science Foundation.The scope of this current work is to develop a better understanding of engineering students’perceptions and opinions on topics within the areas of social justice, social responsibility, andethics within engineering and the impact, if any, of a first-year course in fostering changes inperceptions and opinions among students. The outcomes of this work are limited by thechallenge
: ● helping students establish new relationships with other incoming STEM students, and enhancing students’ feelings of social belonging through peer mentoring ● fostering faculty interaction ● acclimating students to the campus environment ● helping students develop study and life skills to support academic goals and persistence through their first year and beyond Table 1. Overview of Program Changes By Year Program Year Overview of Program Structure Notable Changes/Circumstances 2015 STEM Summer Adventure (outdoor program) and LSAMP Bridge Day (on-campus program) were separate programs (data shown here only reflect participants in
defined for all academic programs offered by Tecnologico de Monterrey.Faculty must reflect on the results of their classes to identify good practices that must bemaintained and areas of opportunity in which he or she must work to improve the results for thefollowing semester. As a result, improvement actions are defined and uploaded into SAEP eachsemester. At the end of the two-semester cycle a meeting with all faculty of each department isheld in which the results of the cycle are presented and discussed. The outcome of the meeting isa list of good practices shared by the faculty and a list of actions for improvement that will beconducted the following cycle. Also, the need for technological or laboratory infrastructure areidentified. In
a Bill of Materials to determine what to buy, quantities, sizes, etc. 10. Construct final model 11. Host exhibition of learning in front of an audience of peers and an invited audience 12. Reflect on the session including personal progress and skills learnedSince the students are at different stages of core skills (Math, Reading, English, etc.), theopen-ended aspect of the project parameters enables the students to learn much moreindividualized engineering skills. Students take the initiative to learn skills necessary to completethe projects they have designed. The instructors then help the students learn these skills and helpmanage safety during the process. However, the design process being followed is consistentacross all ages
physical distancebetween a university and its partner. UIC Local (%Local) measures the percentage of UICpublications of a university collaborating with industry within a 100-km radius from the centerof the city in which the university (or its main campus) is located. This indicator can reflect therelative propensity to engage with partners nearby or within the same urban agglomeration.The UIC Foreign (%Foreign) is the percentage of UIC publications that involve a partnerlocated abroad, which reflects the internationalization of a university in its collaborations.The 2018 data cover 148 universities in China, 308 in the EU, and 175 in the U.S. The publicationsare classified into five broad fields: “Biomedical and Health Sciences,” “Life and Earth
Engineering Despite the country’s growing diversification, engagement in STEM is not reflecting thischange [2]. Understanding the still-present underrepresented racial minority students (URMs) iscomplex, as there are numerous barriers present in both secondary and post-secondaryeducational institutions such as deficits in academic advising, uninviting environments resultingfrom adverse stereotypes, inadequate access to information about college preparation [1], andlack of family, faculty, and peer support [3]. In addition to underrepresented racial minorities,women continue to be underrepresented in engineering fields and experience many of the samebarriers [4]. While navigating these barriers, underrepresented students additionally
, BME has been recognized as an engineering discipline unique in itspurpose and practice. Early on, BME was recognized for being more deeply aligned withtraditional science, biology in particular, than other engineering disciplines [4]. BME’s uniqueposition is illustrated in the varied structures of BME programs at institutions around the world.BME programs stem from electrical, mechanical, and materials engineering departments andmany programs partner with medical schools [1]. Across different institutions, BME career pathsvary, ranging from medical school, graduate school, the medical device industry, thepharmaceutical industry, and more. The broad interpretation of a BME degree is also reflected instudents’ perceptions of BME. When asked
. communities where it is in the project. 2) Each team member presents a final reflection where they discuss the reality of our society in terms of the problems detected and the intervention that as professionals through the construction industry, can have to improve the quality of life of the same. Bibliography Identify the origin of the data and information. (5%) Format Present the report in a professional and organized way. (5%) Teamwork Bring an individual feedback to your team members Teamwork; resilience. rubrics about their participation and performance in the (5%) development of the project.4.0 Case
toengineering by placing them in teams and asking them to build and customize the design of anunderwater remotely operated vehicle (U-ROV). Students were also tasked with competing withthe U-ROV in a timed obstacle course at the end of the program. In this study we examined howstudents participated in and built intra-team working relationships within the EAP using anembedded graduate student researcher, who simultaneously functioned as a team member, and anapproach informed by ethnographic research methods. Data were generated by the graduatestudent researcher through a reflective journaling practice, design artifacts detailing materialsproduced by students, as well as debriefings conducted with program mentors and directors. Inaccordance with an
plotted with error bars representing standard deviation.The qualitative survey results indicated student perceptions on intervention related activities andtheir overall confidence in knowledge gained. For the survey statement “Completion of theequipment specific worksheet helped me feel more confident in equipment specific expertisenecessary to troubleshoot the associated device”, 73% of the students agreed or strongly agreedon its utility (Figure 2). Overall, majority of students recognized the effect of tear down activitiesin improving confidence as reflected by survey results (Figure 2).Because this data is representative of 3 males and 12 females, additional data needs to becollected before any statistically significant difference can be
transcribedand coded using Dedoose software. A coding scheme was developed inductively based oncommonly occurring themes and themes relevant to existing literature. The aim of this study wasto identify factors contributing to persistence of women in engineering, so particular attention waspaid to respondents’ reflections on both supports received and barriers faced in their pursuit ofengineering at a community college. Detailed demographic characteristics of interviewrespondents are reported in Appendix B.FindingsMotivation to study engineering and choice of majorResearch indicates that about 70% of students who complete bachelor’s degrees in engineeringintended to do so as early as their senior year in high school and motivations for
was based on the work ofLutz & Paretti [18], which reflected the kinds of learning that newcomers reported as necessaryon-the-job. A priori codes consisted of four categories of engineering activity: “Teamwork andCommunication,” “Self-Directed Learning,” “Engineering Design,” and “Engineering Identity.”In coding the interview data, new codes were allowed to emerge from an inductive approach, andthe codebook underwent changes. A new activity category, “Adulting,” was added, “EngineeringDesign” was changed to “Technical work,” and within each category, subcodes were developedto describe the specifics of that genre of activity (such as “Interpersonal - Manager” under“Teamwork and Communication,” or “Time Management” under “Self-Directed
collaborative relationship with theEngineering Ambassadors Network and located other engineering ambassador programs aroundthe country that focus on broadening the participation of underserved groups in engineering.Fifty stakeholders participated in 30-45 minute interviews.Phase Two: Research Agenda Meeting (March 2019 – August 2019)During this phase, the steering committee is co-planning the research agenda meeting informedby the initial interview findings. The meeting will take place in September 2019.Phase Three: Research Agenda Proposal (September 2019 – March 2020)During this phase, we will create an iterative process of synthesis which allows for stakeholdersto reflect on, respond to, and otherwise inform the findings of the proposal writing
onmany different levels. Active learning and other evidence-based learning strategies promote adeeper understanding of complex material because students are forced to think about the materialand apply fresh concepts to new situations [1]-[4]. Hands-on learning is a particular form ofactive learning where students engage in a topic in several different ways including sight, sound,and tactile sensory input [5]-[8]. While engaging multiple senses, students can interact with otherstudents and reflect on how their understanding of some topic can be used to explain a particularphenomenon. When the hands-on experiences are well-designed, students can go beyond thelecture material and observe how theory is manifested in the real world. Unfortunately
if it was me and my group that had kind of said, "When are we going to get a civil one? [. . .] and [the instructor] said, "Weren't you excited about the popsicle bridge?" [. . .] After reflecting about what that person I asked me, I thought, "Wow, I didn't really go as far as I should have if I really would have been passionate about structural or civil engineering as some of these people are about what they're doing."For Natalie, ultimately hitting these barriers related to interest and technical content promptedher to navigate out of her civil engineering program.Theme 3: Navigating intersecting stereotypes and compounding marginalizationThird, participants’ decisions to leave were also linked to
, we have tracked retention of ourprogram’s students prior to and throughout our project progression to examine whether ourinterventions have affected student persistence. This paper reflects some of the currentconclusions drawn from this retention analysis.Data Analysis MethodsData presented here are of students enrolled in the program before and after the project began.We have analyzed and compared historic student demographics, course grades, academicprogression, retention, and graduation rates. We obtained student demographics, transcripts, andcourse grade information through the university’s enrollment management office. We alsocollected student demographics information via student survey within department-specificcourses. Enrollment
Botswana towards sustainable economicgrowth, global competitiveness, and improved quality of life (Atkinson & Mayo, 2010). On October 1st, 2016 Botswana formed the Ministry of Tertiary Education, Research,Science and Technology with the explicitly stated goal of transforming Botswana from aresource-based to a knowledge-based economy. The impetus for such an initiative was set forthin Botswana’s Vision 2036. Set forth in 2016, this new “vision” for Botswana was predicated onthe mapping of a transformative agenda that reflected the aspirations and goals of the nation. Forthis vision to come to fruition it was imperative that Botswana create a strategic plan to help withredefining their resource-based economy to that of a knowledge-based
real-time polling software Poll Everywhere (2019) asked one quantitativeand one qualitative question regarding the qualifications reflected in the resume before them.FindingsA total of 36 students participated in this exercise. Students who received Candidate 1’s resume(first name on resume: “Julie”) were asked “You are the recruiter at a defense contractor seekingto fill an entry level structural engineering position. How likely are you to offer Candidate 1 aninterview?” Students were provided response options on a 5-point Likert-type scale, which wasdisplayed as a bar chart in real time for the class. As shown in Figure 1, no students indicated a“Very high likelihood” of offering Candidate 1 an interview and one student indicated a “Verylow
need for further analysis of the time frame that students spent during theacademic year and how much of their daily, weekly, and monthly is allocated for using sharedspaces. This information can be used for many different purposes, including the seminar or eventadvertisement, as well as providing additional supporting sources for educational purposes. 3Figure 1. The usage of the co-curricular spaces in campus climate among the underrepresentedgroupsFigure 2 is a detailed analysis of the co-curricular spaces within a time frame of daily, weekly, andmonthly uses. All the responses reflect the behavior of minority students towards using theavailable co-curricular areas. A comparison with the users
experiences in the department. Q1_7 My mentor provides me with guidance 3.2593 0.9842 0.6959 on attainable academic objectives. Q1_8 I have discussed the importance of 3.1111 0.9740 0.4739 developing a realistic view of my academic career with my mentor. Q1_9 My mentor asks me probing questions 2.6667 0.9608 0.5784 so that I can reflect on my academic career PROGRESS Q1_10 My mentor provides me with practical 3.4074 0.9711 0.5484 suggestions for improving my career performance. Q1_11 My meetings with my mentor are 2.9630 1.0554
summer BEST program was in all senses a success. Teachers reportedvery positive feedback. In addition, bioengineering faculty reported strong support for theprogram to continue. This year we have begun preparing two manuscripts to describe and reportour progress in the BEST program. In addition, we have been reflecting on ways to deepen ourunderstanding of the program impact on teachers as well as their classrooms. As we consider arenewal application, we are defining ways to strengthen and analyze the program morerigorously.CONCLUSION Reflecting on the progress made through the end of year 4 of this grant support, we areconfident that the BEST program is having a positive impact on its participants. We continue torecognize the importance