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
research [1], [9]. Unlike earlier interventions that took place in controlled labenvironments, our ecological approach is implemented directly within the courses that haveknown demographic disparities in academic outcomes. The intervention materials, such asstudent narratives or “stories” of struggle, are created and tailored based on focus groups madeup of students who have previously taken the course [2]. Rather than being delivered by externalresearchers, our ecological belonging intervention approach is led by the course instructors. Thisallows instructors to connect more meaningfully with students and engage in open discussionsabout challenges and how to overcome them. Instructors also facilitate peer conversations tofoster a sense of
). Each student had at least two tours to choose from, as well asopportunity to explore the campus on their own.A mini-resource and graduate fair was also held during the poster-presentation sessions. Both C6and CPSLO students could visit with representatives from Cal Poly STEM-related programs aswell as from graduate programs at Cal Poly and other partner universities.Equally as important, C6 students, faculty and staff were given time to network with those fromother campuses. To encourage these interactions, each C6 student/faculty/staff member wasprovided with a name badge having the C6 logo and the logo of their particular college. Inaddition to their first name, students were also asked to write their major on their badge toencourage
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
Foundation – Advanced Technical Education Grant AwardFaculty at Purdue University through the Supply Chain Management program and Ivy TechCommunity College in the statewide Supply Chain Management and Logistics curriculumcommittee came together in writing a proposal for an NSF Award “Technology-Based Logistics:Leveraging Indiana’s Role as the Crossroads of America” (Awards 1304619 and 1304520),which specifically addresses current industry concerns for future workers in supply chainmanagement technology through building a pipeline of educational curriculum that begins withsecondary education and continues through community college and four year institutions. Whileseveral of the pieces of this curriculum were already in existence, the grant provided
regarding the pros and cons of various energysources. Succeeding in this role requires that the player understand and apply the knowledgeabout power and energy systems learned in both the classroom and the game environment,together with the writing skills to collect appropriate evidence and compose a persuasive piece ofwriting. In fact, the game is designed in the way that automatically composes a final report forthe player by using every justification the player provides in the question prompts (Fig. 1b) atdifferent game stages.Fig. 1: (a) Chat with Mayor for the assignment; (b) a question prompt after a player visited the Mayor's roomAfter players exit the city hall, they must talk to different power system experts located in officesspread
heavilysubsidized tuition), the combination of participation in (a) a scholarship program and (b)academic support services resulted in higher academic achievement and retention for females(but both males and females used support services and peer advising at higher rates) compared togroups of students who participated in either (a) or (b) but not both. In the book Talking AboutLeaving, Why Undergraduates Leave the Sciences, 3 it is stated that nationally 40 percent ofundergraduate students leave engineering programs, 50 percent leave the physical and biologicalsciences programs, and 60 percent leave mathematics programs to pursue other non-STEMprograms.Recent findings from the Academic Pathways Study (APS) have shown that among the factorsthat predict the
directly.Using Physical MEAs to Help with Self-AssessmentFor many MEAs, providing a means for students to “check” the validity of their models can bequite difficult. Strategies can include providing fictitious data from the client, referring studentsto peer-reviewed literature, and depending on student experiences to help them determine when asolution “seems” correct. We have found that one of the most powerful ways to provide self-assessment is in the form of actual laboratory or physical activities. Examples of this include theCatapult MEA and the Force Transducer MEA.Catapult MEAThe Petersborough Museum in England hosts a Medieval Exhibition each year, and plans to holda catapult launch competition. As part of the competition they want to award a
Aheadcurriculum also included some metacognitive skills surrounding learning mathematics.By reviewing research of other summer bridge programs, as well as both formal data collectionand anecdotal feedback from Engineering Ahead students, it became obvious that mathematicsreview and preparation was not the only significant factor that related to increasing retention inengineering. Thus, over the last nine years, Engineering Ahead has worked to build intra- andinter-institutional partnerships to systematically support student success. What started out as aclose daily interaction with a single mathematics faculty member during the summer bridge, nowincludes cooperative learning under the supervision of peer mentors as well as partnerships thathave been
consists of “institutionalstructures, resources, and responsibilities that influence students’ identities within their academicinstitution and engineering as a career” [9, p. 2].The networking strand includes two elements ofnetworks, interpersonal and intertextual to support their personal, academic, and professionaldevelopment. Interpersonal networking consists of the present, past, and historical relationshipsbuilt with faculty, peers, and professionals that contribute to students; identity development andsuccess, while intertextual networking includes students’ accessing books, articles, andeducational technology to expand their knowledge and understanding of the field.ResultsWithin the research project’s lifespan, we have collected stories