Paper ID #47049BOARD # 326: BASE Camp at Mines: NSF BPE Track 4 Phase 1: Year 1Dr. Danni Lopez-Rogina, Colorado School of Mines Danni Lopez-Rogina has a Sociology PhD from the University of Colorado Boulder with additional certifications in College Teaching and Behavioral Statistics. They work as a Post-Doctoral Researcher at the Colorado School of Mines. They specialize in race/ethnic relations, immigration, and social inequality. Danni is interested in building programs and curriculum that focus on shifting the tone from shame and anxiety on what people did not know to a proactive desire to rebuild institutions
Paper ID #47482BOARD # 223: AI-UPP IRES Year 1: Program Development and InitialLessons LearnedProf. Mark A Chapman, University of San Diego Mark Chapman is an associate professor at the University of San Diego in the Department of Integrated Engineering. His interests lie in the fields of skeletal muscle mechanics, muscle disease, exercise physiology, international education and engineering education. He earned his MS and PhD in bioengineering from the University of California, San Diego and a B.S. in biomedical engineering from the University of Minnesota. ©American Society for Engineering
Paper ID #45250Work-in-Progress: Development of an HBCU/Research 1 Collaborative toIncrease African American Semiconductor Manufacturing ResearchersDr. Laura Sams Haynes, Georgia Institute of Technology Dr. Laura Sams Haynes is faculty and Director of the Office of Outreach in Electrical and Computer Engineering at the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta. Laura is passionate about developing and launching various outreach initiatives for K12 Atlanta Public Schools (APS) partners, including students and school counselors, as well as fostering HBCU partnerships, collaborations, and pathways, often with a focus on NSF
Paper ID #46630BOARD # 474: Years 1 & 2: Investigating the Computer Science as a Career(CSAC) S-STEM Program and Computing Identity Development for Studentswith Financial NeedDr. Sarah Rodriguez, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Sarah L. Rodriguez is an Associate Professor of Engineering Education and an affiliate faculty member with the Higher Education Program at Virginia Tech. Her engineering education research agenda centers upon engineering and computing identity development of historically marginalized populations at higher education institutions. Currently, Dr. Rodriguez is involved with several
inequities [1]. Several studies highlight the broader challengesfaced by this population in STEM education and higher education. For instance, a studypublished in Educational Researcher found that minority students are disproportionatelyunderrepresented in special education, including programs that could lead to STEM fields [2],[3]. Additionally, research on inclusive higher education programs indicates that students withintellectual disabilities often lack access to postsecondary education opportunities, limiting theirparticipation in fields like engineering [4]. These systemic barriers contribute to theunderrepresentation of individuals with intellectual disabilities in engineering design and relateddisciplines, further reinforcing inequities
inclusive engineering education.IntroductionThe construction of the U.S. interstate highway system—spanning nearly 41,000 miles—was amajor engineering achievement of the 1960s. However, this period of infrastructure expansionexacerbated racial inequities across many American communities. Numerous highways wererouted directly through vulnerable urban areas, predominantly Black neighborhoods, furtherentrenching segregation and displacing residents [1]. Civil engineers of the time oftenoverlooked the social ramifications of these large-scale projects - sometimes unintentionally, butat other times deliberately. Historically, engineering education has primarily emphasizedtechnical skills, fostering a disconnect between engineering practices and the
plausible [1]. While the nuclear industryhas long sought to increase its workforce, the United States’ recent commitment to triple itsnuclear capacity by 2050 has intensified this need [2]. National Labs and the private sector alikeseek employees with nuclear and nuclear-related expertise, even as student and public interestremains somewhat lower than other engineering disciplines and careers [2]. At the same time, thenuclear community continues to seek a diverse workforce, knowing that diversity improves workquality and innovation across project teams and organizations. Nuclear engineering as adiscipline has also committed to, in recent years, rectifying injustices of the past, whereminoritized communities were taken advantage of
components of the learningenvironment, such as levels of student engagement, student performance in the course, andstudent ratings of the class. Understanding the implications of class time in engineering could bea significant factor in improving student success rates. In the current study, the implications ofstart time on student engagement, student perceptions, and academic performance in two secondyear public engineering courses are investigated.This study includes data from multiple semesters of each course during which the classes havebeen offered at varying times between 8:30 am and 1:55 pm. The course content and structurehave remained consistent across the semesters. Department logistics determined the schedulingvariations and created an
been identified as one’sconfidence in successfully performing tasks associated with conducting research and has aninfluence on research-oriented goals, expectations of performing research, and effort spent onconducting research [1], [2]. Importantly, the research training environment is a predictor ofstudents’ self-efficacy beliefs. Critical is the student’s belief that their training environmentsupports and promotes research and independence [3]. Mentorship has been found to be asignificant predictor of self-efficacy regarding general research methods, which is a componentof overall research self-efficacy for graduate students [3]. Recent research shows that peers andmentors have a “deep impact on the level of self-efficacy and persistence
, there is both an opportunity and a need to utilize this interest for innovative and engaging faculty development purposes [1]. For learning games to reach their full potential, the data produced by these games should be analyzed to make improvements to the game and assess users’ learning. Since each game produces unique types of data and requires different interpretive approaches, a universal method for analysis does not exist. This underscores the need to create a customized data analysis system for analyzing gaming data that can be used for this project and other games in the future. This paper presents an overview of the game’s design, its data collection process, the development of a customized analysis workflow, and the broader
pursuing a STEM degree change their field of studywithin their first three years [1]. When observing engineering students specifically, a longitudinalstudy that referenced data from nine four-year institutions across southeastern United Statesfound that students switching out of engineering most often choose to major in business or a non-engineering STEM discipline [2]. Understanding the factors that drive student attrition versuspersistence, while identifying effective resources and activities to support retention, has becomea major priority for many engineering departments.When investigating persisters versus non-persisters, one study cites factors like academicconfidence, financial concerns, and outside familial/friend influences as being
environments, was also noted as a crucial influence. The study concluded that institutionalsupport plays a critical role in mitigating these challenges. Suggested improvements includewriting programs, availability of academic resources, opportunities for peer collaboration,incorporation of AI tools, and establishment of supportive learning environments. These initiativescan significantly enrich the academic writing skills of IGS, ultimately enhancing their academicperformance, retention, and success in their chosen fields.Keywords: Perception, International Graduate Students, Academic writing, Higher Education.1.0 IntroductionInternational students make significant contributions to the diversity and richness of academicinstitutions globally [1
showcase might reflect elements ofservingness. The multidimensional conceptual framework of servingness includes both indicatorsof serving and structures for serving. Specifically, we asked (1) how relevant is the servingnessframework to materials designed for a graduate program recruitment process; and (2) whatadaptations may be necessary to allow for this framework’s application to the graduate programrecruitment process context? We employed framework analysis to identify which, if any,elements of the servingness framework were represented in the showcase presentation. Aftercompleting content analysis of the institutional slides and thematic analysis of the programpresentations, we conducted focus groups with graduate program leaders to receive
international graduate studentenrollment in a top-tier college of engineering in the Midwestern United States. “Currently, thereis little understanding of how international student recruitment practitioners operationalise [sic.]institutional strategies and how these practitioners respond to their institutional strategies [1].” Inaddition, graduate student recruitment has become increasingly competitive as it strives tocompete with demands for personalization, timeliness, fiscal limitations, etc. [2]. The intention isto build a project management model that is readily accessible to higher education practitionersand assists them with managing the detailed steps required to address these competing demands.While the Agile Manifesto was founded in 2001
collaborative, in-classlearning activities. This paper provides more detail on these strategies and the proposed means ofassessment. Instructors may consider incorporating these types of changes into their courses tosupport their students’ sense of belonging and engagement in their courses.1. IntroductionHistorically underrepresented minority students and low-income students are proportionally lesslikely to graduate with STEM degrees as compared to typically overrepresented students [1] –[3]. These groups of students will be collectively referred to as “from minoritized groups inSTEM, or MGS [students]” [4]. A possible key contributor to this gap in graduation ratesbetween MGS and majority students is belonging uncertainty [5] – [8], feelings that
Engineering Education, 2025 WIP: A Call to Action: Developing A Leadership Program that Supports Academic Caregivers Using the Kotter Change ModelIntroductionHigher education has adopted a capitalistic model prioritizing productivity and efficiency, oftenbased on the "ideal worker" with no outside obligations. As a result, academics with caregivingresponsibilities face added pressure [1]. While caregiving traditionally includes childcare andeldercare, the National Academy of Science, Engineering, and Mathematics (NASEM) defines itmore broadly as caring for spouses, dependent children with medical conditions, and extendedfamily members [2]. Since the COVID-19 pandemic, academics, particularly women in STEM,have shouldered a
produce the correct output) but ignore the qualityof their work. The traditional grading system lacks an emphasis on program logic, style, anddocumentation that is necessary for students to grow as programmers and succeed in their futurecareers.Alternative grading systems provide ways for instructors to create a feedback loop in theirclassroom that improves the quality of student work [1]. These systems include standards-basedgrading, specifications grading and ungrading [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7] . Each of these systemsattempts to change the meaning of grades and encourage students to produce higher qualitywork. The application and analysis of alternative grading in CS classrooms is still in its earlydays and additional work is needed to see
each other’sclasses, discussed what we saw, and shared feedback with each other. Our peer observation ef-forts are ongoing in Spring 2025, with a focus on offering the peer observation to junior facultywithin engineering. The focus on junior faculty is motivated to provide this resource to our newerfaculty who may have the most to gain from peer observation.MethodsMany resources exist for developing peer teaching observation protocols, evaluating institutionalor department-level teaching evaluation processes, and training faculty to objectively and/or con-structively evaluate teaching through classroom visits [10, 3, 1, 20]. Starting in January of 2024,our POET group met roughly every three weeks for an hour, beginning with a review of
orientation in order to build a recordof their development as a researcher, communicator, and transdisciplinary team member. Fellowswill be asked to continuously update their portfolio and to write reflections on their progressincluding successes that they have had and barriers or challenges that they have faced eachquarter. The reflection will be discussed with mentors and fed into their individual developmentplan so that the mentors can understand what is working well and what changes need to be made.Regular Meetings: As part of their professional development, fellows will engage in regularmeetings with several different mentors and collaborators. In recognition that at least weeklyinteraction with advisors contributes to fellow’s success [1], each
different parts of a complexsystem interact and influence each other [1]. Applying systems thinking simplifies the analysis ofcomplex problems and makes it easier to make informed decisions. According to Peter Senge[2], systems thinking is “a framework for seeing interrelationships rather than things, for seeingpatterns rather than static snapshots. It is a set of general principles spanning fields as diverseas physical and social sciences, engineering and management.” In all cases, applying systemsthinking makes it easier to make informed decisions by focusing on solutions that consider theroot cause of a problem rather than just addressing the symptoms.Interest in systems thinking has greatly increased in recent years with applications in
success [1, 2, 3, 4]. Since 2000, evaluating applicants with both quantitativemetrics and qualitative factors has been a major focus [1, 3, 4, 5]. Metrics such as the GRE andGPA serve as indicators of potential success, along with measures like research productivity andpublication records [4, 6]. This dual approach ensures a selection process that captures bothacademic readiness and the potential for innovation and contribution to the field [6].The objective of this scoping literature review (ScLR) is to identify existing gaps in the literatureregarding what is currently being discussed pertaining to the admission and application process.Additionally, it serves the purpose of proposing recommendations for future research effortsrelated to the
. This article will provide a snapshot of the state of the practice of how security isintegrated into program curricula by analyzing a subset of the ABET accredited ComputerScience programs. The article will identify at a high-level scope the topics that are covered inthe programs, as well as provide an overview of other aspects of the institutions which impactthe depth and breadth of security coverage available to undergraduate students.IntroductionThe term Computer Science first came about in 1961, coined by numerical analyst andcomputing pioneer George Forsythe [1]. The first computer science department was establishedat Purdue University in 1962, with other programs being created at Miami, Wisconsin, Illinois,and North Carolina shortly
aerospace experience in the field of rocketry and launchoperations. This course provides students with the requisite academic knowledge and technicalexperience needed to successfully design and build small rockets, and to train them in safe andeffective launch and recovery operations. The course provides students with the foundationalknowledge and tools needed to chart a career in rocket design and launch operations, and tosuccessfully compete for technical grants involving rocket research and operations.This paper will detail: (1) the course organization and how it has been structured to satisfy studentinterests in gaining hands-on engineering design experience and familiarity with conducting safe andeffective launch operations; (2) how student
inclusion of 3D printing and advanced data analysissoftware in physics labs to enrich educational outcomes.Keywords: Physics Education Research, Educational Innovation, STEM Education, Kinematics,Experimental Physics, 3D Printing Technology, Tracker SoftwareINTRODUCTIONPhysics education research has increasingly highlighted the need for improvements in laboratoryinstruction, particularly in fostering conceptual understanding and experimental design skills [1]and [2]. Holmes and Wieman argue that traditional introductory physics labs often fail toreinforce conceptual learning effectively [3]. Additionally, model-based reasoning has beenidentified as a crucial component in experimental physics learning [4]. This study contributes tothis ongoing
to design a curriculum that incorporates three things:Bloom’s taxonomy, clearly defined outcomes; and diverse instructional methods. Theirconclusions come from a study that found curriculum fell into one of two camps: 1) thetraditional camps that focus on technology and related labs and exercises, and 2) in much smallernumbers, camps that take a pedagogical approach including building both the technical skills and“skills such as attitudes, motivation, and enjoyment of learning” (p. 71). The two campsrepresent the dilemma Nilson (2010) highlighted when she advocated that higher education take 3“a different and rather novel goal: to educate as
skills and competencies are highly indemand, and these skills and competencies are mostly found and taught in the science educationdiscipline. And one of these disciplines is physics education, which deals with the fundamentalsof the interaction of energy and matter, as well as engineering and technology. The teaching andlearning mechanisms in physics for engineering students involve innovative approaches aimed atenhancing conceptual understanding and promoting deep learning. Research emphasizes the shiftfrom traditional teaching methods to more interactive and inquiry-based strategies to engagestudents effectively [1]. Interactive simulations play a crucial role in teaching physics, particularlyelectrostatics, as they significantly improve
college and transfer seamlessly to any state public engineering program, and weare seeing success. Even as transfer numbers are stagnant or declining elsewhere across ourcampus, for fall 2024, our college enrolled the largest-ever cohort of in-state community collegestudents and the second-largest overall transfer fall cohort. Since fall 2010, overall engineeringtransfer student enrollment has grown 152% (25% increase in the last 5 years). In-statecommunity college matriculation has grown from less than 20 students in 2010, to over 75 in2024.We are proud to perform this work in support of our college mission, which includes generatingnew knowledge and supporting students to become leaders and citizens who improve our worldand the people in it [1
. Dinse 1 and Vahid Motevalli 2,3 Penn State HarrisburgAbstractAt Penn State Harrisburg, veterans and military personnel constitute between 3-6% of studentenrollment. About 26% of these students are enrolled in engineering majors and another 8% areenrolled in other STEM fields. To serve this population with intentionality and purpose, as wellas enhance student success, we find it essential to explore the social and academic gaps for ourstudents, and what types of programming could best address those needs. Past and currentsurveys of this student body have proven to be effective due to a higher than usual response rate.Questions assessed a range of topics, including recruitment pathways, experiences with a
the transition to higher education. According to the National Center for Education Statistics [1], nearly one-third of undergraduate students in the United States are first-generation college students. Those with a family history of higher education typically enter college with a clearer understanding of academic demands and social integration, which enhances their confidence and adaptability [2]. In contrast, first-generation students may find themselves navigating college life with limited support, impacting their engagement and performance. Research indicates that these students often experience feelings of isolation and uncertainty, hindering their academic success [3]. They may struggle to access resources and
departments to look at engineering issues from a non-technical perspective. Thispaper focuses on the first series of courses: sustainability – both as an environmental principleand as a philosophy for social responsibility.This course sequence will be developed in part by utilizing strategies from the Engineering forOne Planet initiative to discuss how all engineers can bring sustainable principles into theirwork, such as how engineering decisions and actions can unintentionally or disproportionatelycause negative environmental consequences for communities that have historically beenmarginalized or negatively impacted [1]. However, instead of solely attempting to address thisfrom an engineering perspective, this work leans on the campus experts in