engineering leadership identity. Details of the findings from the quantitativestudies, including differences between engineering students and their peers in other fields, can befound in [4-9]. The results of those studies were then integrated with protocols found in theliterature from numerous qualitative studies of leadership and / or identity to develop thequalitative focus group protocols utilized with students. The qualitative protocols explored threedistinct areas of student perceptions: engineering identity, leadership identity, and engineeringleadership identity. Table 1 provides an example of the questions utilized in each of the threeprotocol areas.Table 1. Sample Protocol Questions by Area Topic Area Sample Question(s
equivalentto a B+ as compared to a B of their peers” 6. Medsker et al. conducted an experimental study onthe impact of the S-STEM program on student outcomes 7. Based on relevant retention andgraduation data collected in their study, they found that unmet financial needs play a significantrole in student retention and when mitigated, led to enhanced academic success 7.Our project was funded in 2015 by the NSF S-STEM program. The project has two goals. Thefirst goal is to provide S-STEM scholarship support for academically-talented, financially-needyundergraduate students in two engineering departments at our university. These two engineeringdepartments include the Department of Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering (MAE) and theDepartment of Civil
retained in a STEM major with only tenstudents leaving the program (financial eligibility or full time status), a retention rate of 90.2%.The Workshop Series:A key component for success in school and beyond is the training and development of criticalthinking, professional and research skills. A series of workshops are created each semester bythe faculty and/or other support services on campus. Fellows are required to attend twoworkshops a semester. Thus far we have provided or worked with other groups to have thefollowing workshops: resume writing, negotiating salaries and accepting offers, Career Paths:Your Possible Lives, College of Engineering’s Womengineering Luncheon, Expert LearnerSeries (student success themes), Networking/Interview Skills
visuals. Some topics are multiple choice reading and writing more engineering Learning not well explained. No questions but no in their challenging project to enough self testing simple programs. programming problems to challenge questions in the Facebook is used language by solving synthetize their screencasts. but there is no different what they have understanding group discussion. engineering learned. and expand problems
, international, peer-reviewed journals. She is a senior member of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), a member of the Biophysical Society (BPS) and the Society of Woman Engineers (SWE). Page 23.732.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2013 Incorporating Engineering into the High School Chemistry Classroom Lisa Arnold, Ze Zhang, Tolga Kaya, Bingbing Li, Qin HuAbstract A unique experience is provided to pre-service and in-service teachers to participate in aresearch project via a grant won from the
Professorial Re- search Fellow at Central Queensland University. He has degrees from Swarthmore College, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, and the University of Florida. His research on the longitudinal study of engineer- ing students, team assignment, peer evaluation, and active and collaborative teaching methods has been supported by over $12.8 million from the National Science Foundation and the Sloan Foundation and his team received Best Paper awards from the Journal of Engineering Education in 2008 and 2011 and from the IEEE Transactions on Education in 2011. Dr. Ohland is past Chair of ASEE’s Educational Research and Methods division and a member the Board of Governors of the IEEE Education Society. He was the
advance linguistic equity by creating space for more multilingual andmultimodal activities in elementary school classrooms.IntroductionThe number of elementary school students designated as English learners has increased and willcontinue to increase in U.S. schools. In schools emergent bilingual students are often subjectedto low-level content and lower expectations than their monolingual English-speaking peers. Forexample, school leaders may believe that multilingual children need to learn basic Englishlanguage skills first before they can engage in science inquiry and engineering design. Incontrast, other approaches position multilingual and emergent bilingual students in light of theirassets [1]. Our project, thus, views multilingual learners
through the REU program on the post-survey: hard and soft skills. Hard skills thatstudents mentioned were fundamental knowledge acquisition, practice of techniques/skills, andhow to do research. Soft skills that students addressed were higher-order thinking skills,communication, teamwork, professionalism, and networking. Higher-order thinking skills thatstudents addressed include analytical, critical, problem solving skills and creativity.Communication includes communication skills with peers, research teams, and people fromdifferent disciplines of research, presentation of the research through posters, and writing skills.Professionalism includes persistence, patience, confidence, independence or autonomy, and timemanagement.Among hard skills
Education Policy, and have been working as a graduate research assistant to Clemson’s Associate Dean of Undergraduate Education on projects involving tracking and analyzing data on student engage- ment in high-impact practices, proposing and writing grants for joint faculty curricula development, and revamping Clemson’s general education requirements/curricula. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2020 Interactions Between Engineering Student Researcher Identity and Epistemic ThinkingAbstractThis paper describes a multi-phase, multi-institution project with the objectives of 1) exploringhow undergraduate engineering researchers develop their researcher
adaptedintervention rather than a researcher. In delivering the intervention, instructors also engage withstudents about their struggles and challenges while supporting peer discussion around overcomingadversity.The ecological intervention establishes a classroom norm for a) adversity in the course as commonand normal and b) struggles with adversity in the course tend to be surmountable with time andappropriate effort. Instructors deliver the intervention in five parts in one class period: 1)instructors verbally normalize adversity in college, surmountability of adversity, and adversityspecific to the course; 2) students reflect and write down challenges they experience in college andhow they change with time; 3) instructors present first-person narratives
, the inclusion of these skill refinementprograms is especially important. Other programs have also reported on the effectiveness ofprofessional development activities on the enhancement of the REU experience for students fromdiverse backgrounds.(3,4) The Center for Inclusive Education oversees the REU summerprogramming activities by using a multidisciplinary approach while collaborating with otherareas of campus. REU students participate in both a 9-week Research Methods Seminar and aGraduate Prep Class that focuses on writing a personal statement for graduate schoolapplications. These workshops were taught by Stony Brook Graduate students. This led to thedevelopment of near-peer relationships over the course of the summer.Each week students
both the pre- and post- survey. The last two questionsof the survey asked gender identity and age. Gender identity options included (a) man, (b) woman, (c)non-binary, (d) prefer not to answer, and a write in option. Students participating identified as 50% menand 50% women. Average age of the student respondents was 16.8 ± 1.5 years.Definitions of a soft robot In the free response section of the survey, participants were asked “What is asoft robot?”. Overall, students had reasonable ideas about what soft robots were and their uniquefeatures compared to traditional robots. Table 1 shows a summary of pre- and post- survey responses forthis question. While in the post survey, no one answered “I don’t know”, it is important to note that 4
sustainability assessments of biopolymers and biofuels, and design and analysis of sustainable solutions for healthcare. Since 2007, she has lead seven federal research projects and collaborated on many more, totaling over $7M in research, with over $12M in collaborative research. At ASU, Dr. Landis continues to grow her research activities and collaborations to include multidisciplinary approaches to sustainable systems with over 60 peer-reviewed publications. Dr. Landis is dedicated to sustainability engineering education and outreach; she works with local high schools, after school programs, local nonprofit organizations, and museums to integrate sustainability and engineering into K-12 and undergraduate curricula.Prof
decision making. He has co-authored numerous papers in The Engineering Economist, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, International Journal of Production Research, International Journal of Engineering Education, and other peer-reviewed journals. He has been serving as an ABET program evaluator for EAC and ETAC and as a reviewer for various NSF engineering education panels.Dr. John Jackman, Iowa State University John Jackman is an associate professor of industrial and manufacturing systems engineering at Iowa State University. His research interests include engineering problem solving, computer simulation, web-based immersive learning environments, and data acquisition and control.Mr. Farshad Niayeshpour, Iowa
Through Grade Six (EC-6) F COE Curriculum & Instruction (CI) Literacy Instruction EC-6 F COE Curriculum & Instruction (CI) Science Methods F COE Curriculum & Instruction (CI) Early Childhood Methods F COE Curriculum & Instruction (CI) Social Studies Education in Elementary and Middle M COE Curriculum & Instruction (CI) Integrating Reading and Writing F COE Curriculum & Instruction (CI) Project-Based Learning M COE Curriculum & Instruction (CI) Curriculum and Technology in Secondary Education F
“doesn’t necessarily mean that you have learned.” In both cases, it seemed that thestudent had been taught that the acceptable thing to believe is that grades do not completelydefine a student, yet they were unable to tear their deeper evaluations of themselves away fromthe grades they received.When coding, the primary researcher and at least one other researcher read through an interview,mark, copy, or make note of any attitudes, values, or beliefs they find and write analytic memos(Saldaña, 44) where appropriate. Then they meet and discuss their findings, making sure thatnothing of importance is missed. Following that, codes are assigned to the different attitudes,values, and beliefs noted, thereby categorizing and organizing all codes.Codes are
research involves cognitive/social psychology studies of science and engineering problem solving and creativity. His educational research and design work focuses on K-12 urban education in writing, science, technol- ogy, engineering, and mathematics—both in isolation and in various combinations.Birdy Reynolds, University of PittsburghMs. Shelly Renee Brown MEd, The Quality of Life Technology Engineering Research Center; University ofPittsburgh Shelly Brown, M.Ed. is an education and outreach coordinator for the QoLT Center at the Human En- gineering Research Laboratories and the University of Pittsburgh Department of Rehabilitation Science and Technology. Ms. Brown is responsible for all K-12 outreach projects and
discussed codes for each interview until we agreed unanimously on all codes to reduceindividual variation in perceptions about students’ statements. Second, after theme development,we conducted peer debriefing where we asked two peers with knowledge of the course redesignproject and of relevant qualitative methods who were uninvolved in the study to debrief with uson our themes from the interviews. Through this process, we uncovered any interpretive leaps wemade during theme development and further refined our themes. Third, we carried out memberchecking by sharing a complete draft of the manuscript with the interviewed students and askingwhether it accurately reflected their experiences in the course. All students approved thepresentation of their
integration of students and development of student-faculty bonds. It is expectedthat eight seminars will be held per academic year. Potential seminar topics are: (1) The CSET-STEMProgram, (2) Applying for Graduate School and Financial Aid, (3) Finding a Mentor, (4) Ethics, (5)Public Speaking, (6) Understanding Group Dynamics, (7) Managing Intellectual Property, (8) TimeManagement, and (9) Technical Writing.(b)Graduate School and/or Employment Preparation -- Scholars will be urged to register with the SCState Career Center. This will ensure that they are prepared to connect with graduate schoolrepresentatives and employers.(c)Academic Mentors – Each scholar will choose an academic mentor from a list of available mentors.This list will include faculty
and satisfaction. The formative evaluation helps determinewhether project goals were met and what hampered their implementation. A summative reviewassessed this program's impact on student's professional abilities for global employment. TheGlobal Perspective Inventory [20] and Engineering Global Preparedness Index were used tocreate a survey (e.g., the belief that one can make a difference through engineering problem-solving). The evaluator used a Likert scale to poll students before and after IRES. The surveytool examined research skills and global perspective inventory professional skills. Research Skill Development - Pre v/s Post Survey Peer review and publication process Report writing and poster presentation Result
more girls in STEM to make it the new norm. She has also architected SFAz’s enhanced Community College STEM Pathways Guide that has received the national STEMx seal of approval for STEM tools. She integrated the STEM Pathways Guide with the KickStarter processes for improving competitive proposal writing of Community College Hispanic Serving Institutions. Throughout her career, Ms. Pickering has written robotics software, diagnostic expert systems for space station, manufacturing equipment models, and architected complex IT systems for global collaboration that included engagement analytics. She holds a US Patent # 7904323, Multi-Team Immersive Integrated Collaboration Workspace awarded 3/8/2011. She also has
Proceedings of the 2018 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research, ICER ’18, pages 60–68, New York, NY, USA, 2018. ACM. ISBN 978-1-4503-5628-2. doi: 10.1145/3230977.3231000. [7] Briana B. Morrison, Lauren E. Margulieux, Barbara Ericson, and Mark Guzdial. Subgoals help students solve parsons problems. In Proceedings of the 47th ACM Technical Symposium on Computing Science Education, SIGCSE ’16, pages 42–47, New York, NY, USA, 2016. ACM. ISBN 978-1-4503-3685-7. doi: 10.1145/2839509.2844617. [8] Barbara J. Ericson, Lauren E. Margulieux, and Jochen Rick. Solving parsons problems versus fixing and writing code. In Proceedings of the 17th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research
*. 5 3. Working with teammate 5 2 4. Discuss design plans with peers 4 1 5. Using OPNET to evaluate the performance of your design plans 3 6. Writing the report 3 1 Page 26.479.9 7. Preparing a “Promotion flyer” for bidding* 2 *New or enhanced elements in the revised CPBL.2) Moving from Surface Approach to Deep ApproachWell-designed CPBL encourages students to move toward using a deeper learning
Non-linear and Iterative Problem Solving or LaboratoryInteractive engagement with frequent formative feedback:The NRC Discipline-Based Educational Research (DBER) committee “characterizes thestrength of the evidence on making lectures more interactive as positively impacting learning asstrong.” 23(p.122) In a paper commissioned by the NRC for the Evidence on Promising PracticesSTEM Education Workshop,28 James Fairweather writes “The largest gain in learningproductivity in STEM will come from convincing the large majority of STEM faculty thatcurrently teaches by lecturing to use any form of active or collaborative instruction.” A recentmetaanalysis showed that classes with active learning outperformed classes
and Science Education at Clemson University, and the past editor of the Journal of Engineering Education. Her research focuses on the interactions between student motivation and their learning experiences. Her projects include studies of student perceptions, beliefs and attitudes towards becoming engineers and scientists, and their development of problem-solving skills, self- regulated learning practices, and epistemic beliefs. Other projects in the Benson group involve students’ navigational capital, and researchers’ schema development through the peer review process. Dr. Benson is an American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) Fellow, and a member of the European Society for Engineering Education (SEFI
aspect of a space’s environment that notably effects students is the physical arrangementand appearance of a space itself 2, 3. According to Penney et al., students are particularly sensitiveto an environment when they are “first timers”. Students in this study who were visiting amakerspace for the first time and were instructed to write notes about their visit wroteextensively about the makerspace’s appearance. The language that was used to describe amakerspace in this study was overwhelmingly descriptive, describing its respective space as a“dungeon.” 3 Certainly this type of derogatory description is a result of feelings that the studentexperienced when seeing this space for the first time. Other tactics besides the redesign of thespace that
Chair and Associate Professor in the McKetta Department of Chemical and Bioprocess Engineering at Trine University. She received her Ph.D from Michigan State University and bachelor’s degree from Trine (formerly Tri-State) University. Her research interests include engineering education and nucleic acid therapeutics.Dr. Charlene M. Czerniak, University of Toledo Charlene M. Czerniak is a professor at The University of Toledo in the department of Curriculum and Instruction. She received her Ph.D. in science education from The Ohio State University. A former elementary teacher in Bowling Green, OH, she teaches classes in grant writing, elementary science edu- cation, and science teacher leadership. Professor Czerniak
of Arizona Amee Hennig has her B.S. in physics and creative writing from the University of Arkansas as well as her M.A. in professional writing from Northern Arizona University. She oversees the education and outreach activities for the Center for Integrated Access Networks based out of the College of Optical Sciences at the University of Arizona. At the University of Arizona she manages a number of summer programs for Native American students and educators.Daniel Lamoreaux M.A., University of Arizona Daniel Lamoreaux is a current doctoral candidate in the University of Arizona’s School Psychology pro- gram. While working as a graduate assistant for the education office of the Center for Integrated Access
comprehensive series of interventions at three points instudents’ career at the Pennsylvania State University (Penn State)—entering first-year students(Engineering Ahead), rising second-year students (Jump Start), and a transition program forrising juniors changing from a Penn State regional campus to the Penn State University Parkflagship campus. As of this writing, we are beginning Year 4 of the 5-year project. Previouspapers described outcomes for the Engineering Ahead first-year bridge program. This paper is aninterim report that describes outcomes for two cohorts of students who participated in the JumpStart second-year summer bridge intervention.Method: The Jump Start summer bridge is a 4-week residential program on the Penn StateUniversity Park
school teachers andcommunity college faculty who will develop skills in manufacturing research, technical writing,curriculum development, and conference presentation. The goals of the proposed program are to:1) provide a STEM-based platform to engage high school teachers and community collegeinstructors in state-of-the-art manufacturing research, 2) explore a sustainable educational modelthat connects high schools, community colleges, university, and industry to instill futuregenerations with greater awareness and interest in manufacturing, 3) facilitate the developmentof curricular modules, classroom activities, and other instructional materials that will beimplemented in the participating schools and colleges eventually to be disseminated to a