mapping of relevantlearning outcomes throughout the required curriculum, programmatic assessments, andwork toward sustainment of the effort by providing valued assessment reporting.Introduction to the sustainability curriculum effortSince 2020 a small group of faculty at the University of Maryland (UMD), College Parkhave been working toward preparing engineering undergraduates to become bothwilling and able to tackle sustainability challenges. Sustainability is considered broadlyto include the three pillars of sustainability: environmental, social, and economic. In oureffort we also address topics from the Engineering for One Planet (EOP) framework [1],in particular systems thinking and critical thinking, and we explicitly consider diversity
engineeringnationally hover around 60%, but dip below 40% when accounting for various underrepresenteddemographics [1], [2]. Notably, these figures often paint an overly optimistic picture, asuniversities typically exclude pre-engineering students or those facing initial obstacles to startingthe engineering curriculum from graduation rate calculations.At Lipscomb University, students are allowed to declare engineering upon admission.Anecdotally, we see that many of these students attrit (to another degree program or leave theuniversity altogether) before beginning their engineering curriculum. This attrition is primarilyattributed to challenges in math remediation and delayed graduation timelines. Consequently, theactual graduation rates for this at-risk
, undergraduates and alumni. Afew of the many examples of successful mentoring are faculty-led programs that helpundergraduates with technical, ethical and professional problems [1]; the creation of graduatestudent communities as mentoring groups [2,3]; the mentoring of new graduate studentinstructors by existing graduate student instructors [4]; undergraduate student mentoring oftransfer students who are new to STEM [5] and residential peer mentoring of early engineeringstudents and at-risk students by upper-level undergraduates [6].In 2021, the Ralph E. Martin Department of Chemical Engineering at the University of Arkansas(U of A) created an undergraduate mentoring program using departmental alumni as career pathidentification as well as professional
fabricationas well as design improvement and optimization. Each quarter, student teams must submit aprogress report and demonstrate a physical working prototype at the end of academic year. Duringfall, winter and spring quarters, they conduct an oral presentation to faculty and practicingengineers from industry. Since this is a capstone project course, many ABET Student Outcomesare assessed each quarter as indicated in Table 1. Written, oral and student contribution rubricswere developed specifically for the capstone project course and are used during assessment andevaluation. The assessor body includes Engineering Technology program faculty, industry advisoryboard members, sponsoring company engineers as well engineers from various local engineers
in their capabilities of using CAD software. Therefore, there iscurrently a lack of research investigating how students develop self-efficacy in relation to CADprior to their undergraduate degree.As there currently does not exist a validated scale to measure CAD self-efficacy, in this paper,we explore the related concepts of undergraduate engineering students’ initial 3D Modeling andEngineering Design self-efficacy before formal CAD instruction at the university level.Bandura’s Theory of Self-Efficacy suggests there are four main sources of self-efficacy: masteryexperiences, social persuasion, vicarious experiences and physiological states [1]. Therefore, weaim to answer the question: “What prior CAD learning experiences influence
faculty members can be supported during different career stages of our lives(for example, their transition points from graduate student to advanced researcher and/ or juniorfaculty members and finally helping them to transition into mid-career faculty positions like anassociate professor and helping them move onwards full professor or administrative positions)based on our own first-hand experiences. The goal of this autoethnography is to include thecultural and linguistic assets and unique world views that international faculty members bringand finding ways to leverage them while promoting professional development, mentorshipsupports, and preserving their mental health.1. IntroductionInternational faculty members play a vital role in shaping the
learning strategies. These strategies require further investigation as they areincreasingly important to integrate within the classroom, especially for challenging STEM-basedcourses. By specifically fostering motivation and SRL, students can engage more effectivelywith the material, leading to improved learning outcomes. To investigate these components of thelearning process in engineering, we collected self-report measures of achievement goalorientation (motivation), general self-efficacy (motivation), and motivated strategies for learning(SRL) for 146 undergraduate engineering students in Thermodynamics.To better understand (1) the interconnected nature of these constructs for students and (2) theself-regulatory and motivational profiles of
professionalintervention, mental health symptoms can worsen and become more challenging to treat.Therefore, this study uses a quantitative approach to investigate the beliefs that first-yearengineering students hold about seeking mental health treatment and the influence of these beliefson their intention to seek professional help. This study addresses the following research questions:1) Which factors are most strongly associated with first-year engineering students’ intention toseek mental health treatment? 2) What beliefs about the outcomes of professional mentalhealthcare are most predictive of students’ intention to seek treatment?This study used a self-report survey instrument that employed the Integrated Behavioral Model(IBM) as an empirically supported
students.While a sense of belonging can lead to higher retention and persistence, the feeling of beingexcluded can lead students to leave STEM majors or drop out of university entirely [1]. Mistakeswhen setting makerspace culture can be costly in terms of diversity by pushing out students whootherwise are borderline in their perceptions of belonging in STEM programs and institutions.This work-in-progress paper shares results from the first year of our two-year study. In year one,we focused on collecting data on the experiences on inclusion and exclusion that students face atour institution. This paper provides a preliminary analysis of that initial data and providessuggestions to our makerspace director and other institutional leaders. While we
–particularly Latinos/as/xs – have been perceived as disruptive elements of theAmericanization project [1]. Latinos/as/xs have been framed as individuals that are unable tosucceed in academic spaces because of inherent deficits and thus unable to accommodate tothe demands of American exceptionalism [2]. Engineering is no exception to this deficitframing of Latinos/as/xs. In fact, engineering has a long history of discrimination towardminoritized groups that is still present today in engineering programs [3]. For instance,Latino/a/x engineering students still contend with the enduring repercussions of deficitideologies, racialization, and a process of assimilation through subtractive schooling [4, 5].Engineering has, too, embraced an educational
. HLAsdesign a personal leadership development plan, attend monthly meetings, and enjoy specialevents with invited speakers and corporate sponsors. Each HLA is matched with a professionalmentor who provides coaching in leadership and professional development.HLAs are expected to take courses supporting their leadership development. For many years, thecollege offered only one course focused on engineering leadership [1]. JHLP’s curricularcomponent was enhanced in 2019 with the launch of the Undergraduate Certificate inEngineering Leadership and the creation of a new course, Experiential Leadership.Experiential Leadership was designed to provide course credit for undergraduate studentsparticipating in JHLP as Holmes Leadership Associates and pursuing
withinengineering competition teams [1], and to examine how these teams, along with the formalengineering curriculum, impact undergraduate students. Our study includes interviews with arange of undergraduate engineering students, primarily those who have been members of theseteams for several years. Additionally, we have interviewed alumni who were once members ofthese teams but have since graduated, providing insight from individuals who have completedtheir college journey and are now working in the field of engineering. Through these interviews,we aim to identify patterns and specific factors related to the transfer of knowledge betweenengineering teams, both within and outside the classroom, as well as the knowledge andopportunities facilitated by the
F. Salazar-G´omez2 , Cynthia L. Breazeal1,2 sharifah,abagiati,salacho,breazeal@mit.edu 1 Media Lab, 2 Open Learning Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyAbstractThe pervasive and rapid advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AI) necessitates a fundamental AIunderstanding for all individuals. AI’s dynamic nature often makes it challenging even fortechnical people to stay continuously updated on AI, making it especially essential forprofessionals in leading positions, regardless of their technical background. Understanding AIequips leaders to make knowledgeable decisions about AI’s responsible
al., 2019;Lutz & Paretti, 2021). Finally, as summarized in Paretti, McNair, & Leydens’ (2014), a robust bodyof engineering communications research identifies three clear insights to inform best practices forteaching communication skills to engineers: 1) communication instruction should be situated withinengineering contexts; 2) communications-intensive courses should be central to major requirements;and 3) engineering content learning can be enhanced with communication assignments.Despite these cross-cutting insights on engineering communication, challenges remain with thepractical work of integrating communication skills across a range of engineering curricula. Towardthis point, in their seminal work on engineering communication
' native and secondary languages to boost their grasp of scientific ideas.Research [1] confirms that this approach enhances students' scientific understanding. To foster asupportive teaching environment, a workshop was recently held for teaching assistants, whichHan et al. [2] found effective in building community and attracting international students seekingto improve their teaching skills. In the work by Pierson [3] the concept of translanguaging iselucidated as a dynamic process where individuals leverage diverse languages and modes for thepurposes of meaning-making and expression, particularly within the context of bilingual andEnglish-dominant STEM classrooms. This process is posited to facilitate learning by allowingfor a more inclusive and
groups. This observation is consistent with national trends showing underrepresentation ofLatina/o populations in STEM disciplines.[1], [2] With this motivating background, a study hasbeen undertaken to explore the social, cultural, educational, and institutional factors affectingmatriculation of undergraduate Latina engineering students into graduate engineering programsand/or industry careers. A research team was formed with four members (co-authors of thispaper) from diverse backgrounds but a common commitment toward an asset-based approachthat avoids marginalizing individuals in the research design process and by selecting respectivemethods.[3] Results of these team discussions and decisions sought balance between variousphilosophical
provide programs and spaces where minority studentscan foster higher self-confidence and positivity towards engineering.IntroductionReducing the gender gap in educational outcomes requires better recognizing the systemicbarriers that exist in higher education. Individual, group, institutional, and societal factors playan essential role in maintaining the gap in women's college attainment, particularly inengineering. According to the National Girls Collaborative Project [1], young women havesimilar abilities in mathematics and sciences but differ in their confidence, interest, andbelongingness to science-related fields, compared to young men. Historically, engineering hasbeen framed and perceived as a male-dominated discipline, emphasizing traits
preliminary list of good practices for inclusiveinstitutional and pedagogical support for BLV learners pursuing introductory ECE education. Wealso believe that the CARE methodology can be used to amplify the voices of other ECEstudents with different disabilities to inform systemic change for inclusive ECE education.1 Introduction1.1 Disability in engineering education and professional fieldsThe 2023 National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics (NCSES) report Diversity andSTEM: Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities defines a person with a disability assomeone who experiences difficulties completing one of the following activities: “seeing wordsor letters in ordinary newsprint (with glasses or contact lenses, if usually worn
Engineering Education, 2024 Lighting a Pathway to Energy Transitions: Collecting, interpreting and sharing engineering designs and research data across a school-based agrivoltaics citizen science network (Resource Exchange)Grade level: 1-12 Time: School year integration Standards Focus: NGSS 3-5 ETSThe Sonoran Photovoltaics Laboratory (SPV Lab) is a network of K-12 students and teachers,scientists, engineers, and community partners encouraging equitable, lasting, sustainableenergy transitions. Specifically, SPV Lab is developing an innovative model for school-basedcitizen science that supports a networked approach to building knowledge in agrivoltaics, a
learning.IntroductionProblem-based learning (PBL) has gained significant traction in recent decades as an alternativeto the traditional learning paradigm of the student being lectured on a concept, memorizing it, andsubsequently working through assigned problems to understand how to use it. In PBL, groups ofstudents work collaboratively under the guidance of an instructor to resolve complex, realisticproblems 1 . While PBL has its roots in the training of medical students, the framework that itprovides fits well with the open-ended and design-oriented nature of many engineering fields. Infact, problem-based learning has been incorporated in teaching courses as varied as constructiontechniques 2 , engineering thermodynamics 3 , and multi-core programming 4 , just to
community tothe center as they gain expertise and engage and participate actively in the sociocultural practicesof the community[7].Figure 1. [7] shows the following components in the situated learning theory: 1) context, theenvironment within which the learning occurs; 2) novice, the learner and newcomer in thecommunity of practice; and 3) experts, who know about the subject to be learned. Figure 1. Model of Situated Learning Theory (From “Situated Learning Theory” by Sandra P. Mina Herrera, used under CC BY 4.0)In [2], the authors considered the traditional classroom to be decontextualized and discussed theapplications of situated learning theory in computer science education and the challenges ofdoing so.ApproachTo
ABET student outcomes. 1 Several others have applied team-oriented PBL methodologies within the context of fluidmechanics courses. Meikleham et al. [5] documented their utilization in a flipped-delivery fluidmechanics course, where they heightened active student involvement through inquiry-basedlearning involving five experiments employing custom-designed kits. Pérez-Sánchez and López-Jiménez [6] adopted a PBL approach centered on learning, research, and reflection acrossvarious courses, spanning different academic levels, including Bachelor's and Master's programs,within a hydraulic and environmental engineering department. They directed
, Geometric Abstraction, and Mathematics as they relate toengineering and art. Woven into the theoretical content are hands-on projects where studentslearn basic sketching skills, hand build a ceramic still-life piece, visit local galleries andmuseums, and, using elements or art and principles of design, turn data into data visualizationsand data physicalizations: data-driven physical artefacts whose geometry or material propertiesencode data. Students use an adapted Jansen and Dragicevic [1] information visualizationpipeline to move from raw data to data wrangling to visual and physical presentation. This paperpresents examples of the process and concludes with observations and lessons learned.Figure 1. Informa0on visualiza0on pipeline. Jansen and
focus around howintroducing a token economy influenced students’ 1) motivation to revisit assignments, 2)perceived time commitment to the class, and 3) approach for completing assignments knowingthat their original attempt was not necessarily their only attempt. From token usage analysis, itwas observed that the combination of reward benefits and the number of exchanges available inthis study’s token economy produced delayed interactions from students with most waiting untilthe end of the course to acquire and spend tokens. This lack of activity within the token economyalso led to students experiencing little perceivable enhancement to instructional content from thestrategy; however, the token economy was perceived to reduce student stress
, presentlessons learned based on feedback from the cohort, and discuss how the teaching of MBSE can befurther improved using active learning techniques and modern technology. It is the authors’intention that other MBSE instructors may consider and implement some of the teachingtechniques discussed in this paper.1 IntroductionModel-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) is the formalized application of modeling to supportsystem requirements, design, analysis, optimization, verification and validation 1,2 . It has oftenbeen claimed that successful adoption of MBSE within a complex systems engineering projectcan lead to benefits regarding schedule and cost - though the extent of these benefits can bedifficult to quantify 3 . To be successful, MBSE requires the
effectively communicate their functionality to peers. These assignmentsculminate in the collaborative curation of a git repository that serves as a valuable resource forcurrent and future students [1]. Importantly, these new tutorials are shared under a CreativeCommons license and provided as Open Educational Resources (OER), allowing free access bylearners worldwide [2].This paper describes the structure of the tutorial development assignment and the steps involved,sharing insights and case studies on how to implement this approach successfully in differentclassroom settings. The methodology for assessing the assignment's effectiveness is discussed.Additionally, this paper addresses the transferability of this approach to a broad range ofprogramming
Outcomes, describing expectations for students’ abilitiesat the time of graduation from an accredited engineering program. Student Outcome #2 requires“an ability to apply engineering design to produce solutions that meet specified needs withconsideration of public health, safety, and welfare, as well as global, cultural, social,environmental, and economic factors” and Student Outcome #4 requires “an ability to recognizeethical and professional responsibilities in engineering situations and make informed judgments,which must consider the impact of engineering solutions in global, economic, environmental,and societal contexts” [1]. Clearly embedded within these two outcomes are the triple bottomline of sustainability. Furthermore, Program Criteria
,podcast analytics are presented to support the estimated high impact and geographic reach of theproject. While the data in this report was created in a course within the Engineering Technologydiscipline, the opportunity to implement this project in any field of study is possible. The podcastproject was able to overcome the motivational challenges often reported with online courses,engage students in the learning process, and help them to persist in the course.1. Introduction1.1 Problem Identification Research has shown that students generally perform better in in-person classes than inonline classes. Recent studies of student groups at for-profit and public institutions found thatstudents in online courses were less likely to complete
were mostly first- or second-year BSE-Mechanical orElectrical Engineering students. There were also a few fourth-year students from theEngineering Technology program who were taking the course as a technical elective.The paper presents modifications that have been made to the course to increase the overall digitalliteracy of our students. The most significant of these modifications was to change fromMATLAB to Python as the primary programming language [21,22]. This change was made forthree main reasons: 1) Python has more of the attributes common to “true” programminglanguages, such as explicit consideration of data types and references to external libraries, 2) Dueto its widespread use and open-source architecture, the quantity and range of
. IntroductionVectors refer to parameters that possess two independent properties, namely, magnitude anddirection. Vectors can be represented in both mathematical and geometric forms, and arecommonly used to quantify physical phenomena such as position, electromagnetic fields, force,velocity, and weight [1-4]. Students typically first encounter vector mechanics in a physicscourse at either the high school or college level. Vector mechanics may be regarded as athreshold concept [5] because, once a student masters them, it marks a transformationalmilestone in the student's ability to understand critical knowledge necessary for subsequentlearning at higher levels [6]. Accordingly, undergraduate engineering students subsequentlyencounter vectors again in