cornerstone and non-cornerstone (original 2 course sequence) sections on many topics covering textbooks, pedagogy,concepts taught, self-efficacy in engineering, and more; 2) student feedback teams used in manysections of the course; 3) University-administered student evaluations given at the end of eachsemester; and 4) the first-year teaching team, which met frequently and worked each summer toimprove course design and supporting materials.This paper outlines the differences between the Full versus Split Cornerstone approaches andlooks at the evolution of a first year culture and other positive effects created in instituting thenew Cornerstone courses. The analysis includes how both the students and instructors areaffected by each approach and the
lostbecause of a small, but difficult, portion of the content. When students feel they are able to notjust understand the material, but truly self regulate to control and master it, their self-efficacy andmotivation improve, as well as persistence on a particular task, to the point of achieving success.4The extent to which this resource impacts student learning shows that it is used increasingly byup to 70% of students across a semester. This will be discussed further in the results section.A second student resource is the Materials Vocabulary Building Resource site located on theopen access vocabulary site of Quizlet.com where the materials science vocabulary can beaccessed at Google keyword: MatSciASU. The site contains over 500 materials science
mathematics (STEM) graduates1, and education and psychology research hasshown that motivation has an effect on student success in STEM fields2–4. As described by theFuture Time Perspective (FTP) theory, motivational attributes have been shown to positivelyaffect student achievement and persistence5. Additionally, Self-Regulated Learning (SRL) hasbeen positively linked with increased self-efficacy of undergraduates6. FTP and SRL have oftenbeen researched separately, but previous literature has reported that there is a link between thesetwo areas2,7–11. We seek to observe the student experience in terms of FTP and how FTP affectsstudent task-specific behavior in terms of SRL, thus investigating this link for engineeringstudents. This paper describes a
Solving (CPS); and to communicate the potential impact of thisscaffolding on underserved minority students’ higher-order skill development through Project-Based Service Learning (PBSL). It contends that adoption of engineering design process inexperiential learning could promote students’ demands for cognitive and metacognitive strategiesof Self-Regulated Learning (SRL) and Creative Problem Solving (CPS), and scaffolding withquestion prompts based on cognitive research findings could better facilitate SRL and CPSprocess of underserved minority students, and lead to their enriched metacognitive experience,meaningful accomplishment, and improvement of self-efficacy and higher-order skills. Theoverall goal of the presented scaffolding instruction is
, and such a process is particularly effective inenhancing conceptual change.2,17 In addition to small group interactions, the benefits studentsidentify are consistent with the intent of the studio design. Specifically, the studios providestructure that allows for guidance and help from the GTA and serve as a “bridge” betweenconcepts and content provided in lecture and the ability to apply this knowledge and skill onhomework. Finally, a few student statements indicated that the studio environment enhancestheir self efficacy by increasing their confidence that they can be successful engineers. This finalfactor may be particularly important for students from demographics that are underrepresented.The alignment between the coded responses and the
professional(i.e. progressing careers, enhancing skills, completing work tasks). Much of the engineeringstudent goal literature is at the undergraduate level. This body of work tends to focus onundergraduate engineering students’ career goals. Researchers have studied the relationshipsbetween students’ future career goals and motivation to learn and persist through [24]–[27],continued interest in their engineering major [28], career goal commitment after graduation [29],and engineering self-efficacy [30], [31]. In their exploration of what factors motivateundergraduate students to enroll in engineering graduate programs, Borrego et al., [32] andKyoung Ro et al., [33] found that career goals can predict enrollment. In one of the onlylongitudinal
in the optimization of product development [35, 36]. Similarly, in our work,we have found that senior engineering students’ engineering design self-efficacy wassubstantially increased through particular creativity training [37]; other benefits associated withteaching creativity in the engineering curriculum derive from the overall increase in studentperformance [7, 38]. During this work, our group measured substantial increases in key outcomemeasures of creativity from engineering students who underwent a semester-long senior designcourse using evidence-based methods (that implement specific creativity learning methods intothe traditional engineering coursework) [39-42].None of these studies, however, has focused on the impact of creativity
in higher education: Psychological barriers to success and interventions to reduce social-class inequality,” Journal of Social Issues, vol. 73, no. 1, pp. 23–41, 2017.[8] A. Kezar, L. Hypolite, and J. A. Kitchen, “Career Self-Efficacy: A Mixed-Methods Study of an Underexplored Research Area for First-Generation, Low-Income, and Underrepresented College Students in a Comprehensive College Transition Program,” American Behavioral Scientist, vol. 64, no. 3, pp. 298–324, Mar. 2020, doi: 10.1177/0002764219869409.[9] J. Roksa and P. Kinsley, “The Role of Family Support in Facilitating Academic Success of Low-Income Students,” Res High Educ, vol. 60, no. 4, pp. 415–436, Jun. 2019, doi: 10.1007/s11162-018-9517-z.[10] C. E
a professional educationcomponent consistent with the institution's mission and the program's educational objectives andpromotes diversity, equity, and inclusion awareness for career success [3]. "The need to feelbelongingness and linked with others" is how relatedness is defined (Baumeister and Leary [8]).According to studies, learning environments that provide a sense of connectedness to peers,parents, and instructors can enhance motivation and improve academic results (Ryan, et al. [9]).Self-efficacy, engagement, interest in school, higher grades, and retention have all beenconnected to feelings of relatedness, which are measured in terms of "school environment" andinstructor-student connections (Inkelas, et al. [10]). Research on
inspection reveals a body of work that includes thought leadership, collegialconversation, and critical analysis of the impacts of the pandemic on all areas and concernstypically considered in the engineering education community. Scholars have documented andexplored emergency remote teaching (ERT) and the implications to or impacts on acceptedteaching pedagogies and teaching modalities, student learning and self-efficacy beliefs,challenges and opportunities with hands-on learning, and the systemic challenges related toinclusivity, equity, access, and engagement in engineering higher education. The enormity of theimpact of the pandemic is underscored by the language of the pandemic ERT literatureincorporating terms like disruption, survival, and
, Oxford, UK, pp. 4424–4429.[11] W. C. Lee, H. M. Matusovich, and P. R. Brown, “Measuring underrepresented student perceptions of inclusion within engineering departments and universities,” Int. J. Eng. Educ., vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 150–165, 2014.[12] D. S. A. Hofacker, “Diversity and Inclusion in the Engineering Workplace: A Call for Majority Intentionality to Increase Career Self-Efficacy,” p. 10, 2014.Appendix A : Semi-structured interview format and questions[Land acknowledgement, introduction, safe space acknowledgement, review of consent form andinterview recording]Demographic Question:1. What is your gender identity?2. How would you describe your background/race/ethnicity?Interview Questions3. Please describe your role in
ASEE Meeting, June 2000.[7] P. R. Lowenthal, M. L. Wray, B. Bates, T. Switzer, and E. Stevens, (2012). “Examining Faculty Motivation to Participate in Faculty Development”, International Journal of University Teaching and Faculty Development, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 149–164, 2012.[8] A. B. Raneri, “Exploring Self-Efficacy of Faculty Participating in a Professional development Certification Program”, Doctoral Dissertation, Education, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, 2017.[9] M. Borrego, J. E. Froyd, and T. S. Hall, “Diffusion of engineering education innovations: A survey of awareness and adoption rates in U.S. engineering departments”. Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 99 no. 3, pp. 185–207
program outcomes, for which the PAtENT pathway model offersinnovative assessment options. The project has begun tracking patent applications from baselinethrough the project, by discipline, student and faculty, which is now available for the AssessmentOffice to utilize. Student learning outcomes can be developed to align with the patent pathway,and larger study of doctoral student mindsets are being informed via the PAtENT surveys (whichmeasure self- efficacy, entrepreneurialism, and other professional skills.DiscussionThough this current research component is a small study, it is informative about the views facultyand students have about our alternate pathway for doctoral candidates in STEM programs. Theresearch informs the project and provides
and self-efficacy. (Henri, Johnson, & Nepal, 2017, p. 612) The How o Frequent, low-stakes assessments to ensure student understanding while also allowing multiple opportunities to learn in multimodalities (in-person competency checks, practice problems, video tutorials, multiple quiz attempts) o In grade book, it looks like there are many assessments (and there are), but they are worth fewer points, and students can easily attain the points by completing of assignments or by exploring other opportunities for learning (Solid Professor/LinkedIn Learning) o Gamification of the classroom. Points system where students start at zero and “earn
thatschool teachers and leaders both found ways to implement integrated STEM within their schoolsystems as a result of participation in the professional development offered on STEM integration.Additionally, the authors found that participants increased their self-efficacy for STEMintegration, but the emphasis of the work from Havice et al. (2019) was on classroomimplementation and teacher experiences. Therefore, while administrators were included in theprofessional development and the study data for some measures, they were excluded formeasures of classroom implementation and there was a lack of measures directly related toadministrator outcomes specifically, suggesting a need to explore administrator experiencesfurther as they seek to bring STEM
change.Teachers play a significant role in helping students develop an awareness of, and interest indifferent career opportunities [1]. They also help shape a students’ self-efficacy and expectationswhich can have a significant impact on the student’s choice of careers [2]. Unfortunately, manyteachers either have little knowledge of the field of engineering or have misconceptions about thefield such as failing to identify engineering as a career that helps humanity [3-4]. EngineeringCommunity Engaged Learning (CEL) is an excellent way to help teachers understand howengineering, as well as other STEM careers, can have a high level of community engagementwhile using creativity to help humanity.For the 2022-2023 Global STEM cohort, RET participants engaged
. Although the formal definition of CURES varies across the literature, the integrationof experiential learning opportunities organized around a motivating research question aregenerally common across implementations. CURES are a uniquely valuable intervention for deployment at two-year institutions, wheremany students face restrictions which prohibit their participation in extracurricular activities. Theimplementation of CURES at two-year institutions presents unique challenges versus universitiesdue to the lack of existing research infrastructure. In addition, many students attending two-yearinstitutions are from historically marginalized groups, and may have limited resource awarenessand self-efficacy as it relates to performing research
kid. Although they can be talkative and make ill-advised jokes, the kids will find you a fun person if you run along with them instead of alwaysdiscouraging them. Kids like and respect fun people, which helps them pay attention to you moreas a mentor." An increase in scientific knowledge and development of character boost kids' self-efficacy in STEM and computing, which is the main purpose of this NSF-funded project. 13 ConclusionOur Mentor Corps program was developed to support teaching computational content for collegestudent mentors to collaborate with intermediate schoolteachers in the classroom
micro-certificate in the professoriate, and led several educational experiences for underrepresented high school students. Amanda plans to pursue a higher education teaching career and research strategies to promote active learning and improve self-efficacy amongst engineering students.Dr. Raj R. Rao, University of Arkansas Dr. Raj R. Rao is a Professor of Biomedical Engineering, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville. He currently serves as the Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Biological Engineering, as an ABET Program Evaluator; and is a member of the Biomedical Engineering Society (BMES) Education Committee. His research interests are in the broad area of cellular engineering that utilize
students stillhave access to help if they need it. Logistics of group work in an online class will need to becarefully considered using video conferencing software.References[1] M. Holdhusen. “A “flipped” statics classroom,” presented at the 122nd ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Seattle, WA, June 14-17, 2015. Paper ID #12162.[2] M. Radu. “Applying the Flipped Classroom Pedagogy in a Digital Design Course,” presented at the 126th ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Tampa, FL, June 15-19, 2019. Paper ID #25080.[3] H. Ozyurt and O. Ozyurt. “Analyzing the effects of adapted flipped classroom approach on computer programming success, attitude toward programming, and programming self- efficacy.” Comput
six broad factors drive students to leave engineering: classroom and academicclimate, grades and conceptual understanding, self-efficacy and self-confidence, high schoolpreparation, interest and career goals, and race and gender. They also noted that studies suggestthat retention can be increased by addressing one or more of these factors [3].In order to address the factors that persistently cause so many students to leave engineering, andto develop a lower-division curriculum that will engage and retain Electrical Engineering majors,particularly those from underrepresented groups, California State University San Marcos, proposesto implement this study to improve retention. This paper will address two of the retention issuesthat Geisinger and
. However, the COVID-19 protocolsimpacted the implementation of these lessons in a VR environment. The lessons were thereforeimplemented such that students could experience them on their computer screens at any time andfrom anywhere. The software platform allowed interaction with the 3D environment usingmouse/cursor controls. The methodology of the development of a VR lesson and links to the VRlessons are included in the paper. Attitude surveys were administered to students before and afterthe implementation of these interactive lessons. Results from these surveys are shared. Thispaper is based on an exploratory project funded by the NSF HBCU Target Infusion Projectsprogram.IntroductionLow self-efficacy associated with challenges in understanding
engineering classes. Institutions might also discover theneed for introductory computational thinking courses that previously were not included in thecurriculum.ECTD results will also allow instructors to understand how their student cohorts function acrossthe broad areas of computational thinking. By using the results, the instructors can focusclassroom and assessment activities to help students mature computational thinking factors thatare less developed. The long-term impact would be classroom instruction that helps increasestudent self-efficacy and improve student enculturation into the engineering profession. ReferencesCattell, R. B. (1966). The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate
pandemic potentially impacted the results ofthis survey. It is also possible that an established survey on self-efficacy in technical writing forengineering students has already been developed. Using a validated survey could provide morethorough and nuanced results than those obtained in this research.It is also important to note that faculty advising practices may need to be adjusted, to furtherencourage sophomore students to enroll in the ENGR 291 Experimental Design and TechnicalWriting course as sophomores, rather than waiting until they are upperclassmen. While increasinga student’s comfort with technical writing is a desirable outcome, increasing their technicalcommunication skills is the primary objective. Faculty should reinforce the
of our PD program in terms of the design of our courses and Saturday workshopsbased on feedback from the teachers. There will also be efforts in facilitating and sustaining acommunity of practice for the teachers.AcknowledgementsThe authors would also like to acknowledge the other collaborators on the project and teachingassistants and instructors of the two summer courses and the Saturday workshops. This workwas supported by the National Science Foundation under grant no. 1837476.ReferencesPeteranetz, Markeya, Shiyuan Wang, Duane Shell, Abraham E. Flanigan, and Leen-Kiat Soh. 2018. “Examining the Impact of Computational Creativity Exercises on College Computer Science Students’ Learning, Achievement, Self-Efficacy, and Creativity
our grade stepped up to the challenges andencouraged each other. A few of the students chatted about attending a college similar toNortheastern University!”.Students provided their own feedback and upon subsequent analysis, several themes emergedincluding self-efficacy, fun, friendship and an awareness that engineering benefits society:“I liked the wind turbine activity because I felt like a scientist.”“I liked the windmill because it was a really cool experiment.”“I liked making the windmills with my friends.”“I liked the windmills because it makes energy for cities and countries.”Discussion and ConclusionsAlthough Northeastern University’s Center for STEM Education has been offering STEM fieldtrips for the past 10 years at no cost to
to understand how to promotemetacognitive thinking within engineering pedagogy. In future research effort, wewill also explore how to incorporate generative learning activities (e.g.self-explanation, mapping and peer teaching (Fiorella & Mayer, 2016) withinengineering to promote critical thinking and meta-cognitive thinking in engineeringstudent.Lastly, further research is needed to explore why students exude confidence inresponses that were not based on sound reasoning. It will be interesting to know howsuch self-confidence is associated with self-efficacy, ability to use constructivefeedback and to adopt strategic learning skills.ReferencesBormanaki, H.B., Y.J. Khoshhal, and Research. The role of equilibration in Piaget’s theory
AmericanAssociation of University Women (AAUW) study concludes that social and environmentalfactors contribute to the underrepresentation of women in engineering, and that girls’achievements and interest are shaped by the environment around them.4,5 Supporting researchidentifies social pressures such as sexism, discrimination, isolation and lack of role models aspressures that leave female students rejecting the field of engineering.6,7 Another major factorthat plays a prominent role in retention of women in engineering is self-efficacy. Femalestudents typically start college with a lack of confidence in their abilities as compared to theirmale counterparts despite comparable academic skills, and women typically transfer out ofengineering earlier and with a
. Resour. Comput., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 1– 18, 2005.[5] G. S. Stump, J. C. Hilpert, J. Husman, W. Chung, and W. Kim, “Collaborative learning in engineering students: Gender and achievement,” J. Eng. Educ., vol. 100, no. 3, pp. 475–497, Jul. 2011.[6] E. A. Flynn, G. Savage, M. Penti, C. Brown, and S. Watke, “Gender and modes of collaboration in a chemical engineering design course,” J. Bus. Tech. Commun., vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 444–462, Oct. 1991.[7] D. Rosch, D. Collier, and S. Zehr, “Self-vs.-teammate assessment of leadership competence: The effects of gender, leadership self-efficacy, and motivation to lead,” J. Leadersh. Educ., vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 96–124, 2018.[8] D. M. Rosch and D. Collier
for completing the higher education. Since we have been practicing this methodfor the last 4 years, we need to study the long-term impact of grouping on the students fromthe early batches. It would be also beneficial to qualitatively analyse students’ and teachers’perspectives including the impact of the method on self-efficacy and engagement of the “abilitygrouped” students. We don’t deny that the “ability grouping” is a controversial method. Further, we don’thave a strong enough evidence of its success at our college. However, the steady improvementin the academic performance over the last four years prompted us to share our findings andopen a discussion on this atypical practice.Acknowledgments We thank the chair of