post assessments within group, with a p-value of.05. A two-sample t-test assuming unequal variance was used to compare the two groups.Open ended survey questions were analyzed by performing a content analysis. Each responsewas entered into a computer software, then codes were assigned to the response inductively. Theinitial codes were later condensed into fewer codes based on program learning outcomes. Directquotations of responses that are provided in this document are verbatim to illustrate the responsesby theme.Class activitiesA one credit class was used to provide interaction between the students, time for assignments anddeliver course content. The first day, the faculty mentor gave an overview of the classexpectations and peer mentoring
University of Minnesota. Her research explores issues of professional development for K-12 science teachers, with a focus on beginning teachers and implementation of integrated STEM learning environments. She has received over $30 million in federal and state grants and published over 80 peer-reviewed journal articles and book chapters. She is a former board member of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching and past president of the Association for Science Teacher Education.Dr. Christopher Barr, Rice University Rice University Office of Assessment and Evaluation of STEM Programs led by Dr. Barr is the Direc- tor of Assessment and Evaluation of STEM Programs at Rice University. He has been an evaluator and
development and delivery of a9-unit Graduate Certificate in Data Science for Biology and Chemistry. The GOLD program isalso an interdisciplinary computing program aimed at students in the Biology and Chemistrydepartments - in this case, master’s students - and it builds on the structure and institutionalsupport implemented in the PINC program, including requiring one of the courses designed forthe PINC minor. In early interviews with PINC students, they indicated that the cohort structureand peer mentor support helped them stay motivated, build relationships with their peers, anddevelop an identity as scientists and programmers; using this feedback as a guide, these aspectswere also incorporated into the GOLD program structure. GOLD PI Rohlfs
features of the change experience are most notable?.The work we report here explores the initial experiences of RED teams as they prepared andbegan implementation of their change projects.Research ApproachThe work described here explores the initial conceptions of RED team members with respect toreadiness to enact change, their perspectives on the team development process, and other topicsrelating to large scale projects. These conceptions were captured via focus groups and informaldiscussions conducted within six months of their award being granted; RED teams opted-in tothe focus group at their discretion. One member of the REDPAR team facilitated each focusgroup discussion, while a second member took notes and transcribed. This study was
CurriculumIntroductionUniversities nationwide, especially those with a research focus, are challenged to improve thequality of teaching and the skills and professionalism of their faculty in the teaching domain. Inthis context, the authors undertook a five-year project, funded by the National ScienceFoundation EHR/IUSE program, to support transformation to evidence-based teaching andlearning practices in the core mathematics, science and engineering courses taken by allengineering students in their first two years at Stevens Institute of Technology. Strategies tosupport faculty change include ongoing discussions of the principles of teaching and learningand discipline-based education research; trained undergraduate peer assistants to facilitate active-learning pedagogies
recognition of the need tohave TAs and peer leaders prepared to support active learning in the lectures and recitations.With each subsequent year in the project, changes were implemented based on lessons learned inthe previous semester. In addition, the focus on cross-course connections has deepened, withfaculty not only looking at concepts that apply across courses but trying to understand whycertain concepts are not transferring. There has also been an increased use of assessments toidentify exactly where the students are having difficulty to address deficiencies in understanding(or, in some cases, gaps in prior knowledge). There are beginning to be more sophisticatedattempts to evaluate the success of the changes that had been made. For example
Paper ID #16880Baton Rouge Community College/Louisiana State University: A Partnershipfor STEM Student SuccessMs. Adrienne Steele, Louisiana State University Adrienne Steele has over 15 years experience in STEM education. Currently, Adrienne works at Louisiana State University in the College of Engineering, managing all aspects of the STEP project that consists of a large-scale peer mentoring program. Previously, she coordinated the Scope-On-A-Rope Outreach Program (SOAR) in the Department of Biological Sciences for 10 years with funding from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute. In this position, she led over 175
Membership Development, Vice Chairman of IEEE Southeast Conference 2019 that was attended by 1100 attendees, organizer of numer- ous international conferences, Invited/Keynote speaker/Panel Moderator/Resource Person in international events. He is a Senior Member of IEEE. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2020 The Inclusive Engineering Consortium Abstract Over the last 7 years, a collaboration of 13 HBCU Electrical and Computer Engineering (ECE) programs has been working together to implement Experiment Centric Pedagogy to improve their student learning experience. The lessons learned and best practices of that effort have
number of students receiving final grades of A or B, and also not a significant numberof students are dropping the course.As part of activity 4, every peer leader student received training that included an introductionsession, weekly preview sessions, and a final lesson learned session. The introduction sessioninvolved faculty engaging peer leaders in cooperative-style learning exercises and mentoring bestpractices that are subsequently applied in the activities. Weekly preview sessions with“gatekeeper” course faculty covered course content and pedagogical approaches. Ongoingchallenges and lessons learned were documented in a final session with all mentors and facultyinvolved. The number of mentors in the fall 2016 were four, in spring 2017 were
Involving RET’sPrior to the inception of the NSF RET program, the first large scale evaluation of teacherresearch experience programs was initiated as The SWEPT Study [11]. Findings from this studyof eight SWEPT sites showed that participating teachers experienced a gain in science contentknowledge, positive attitudes towards science and interest in engaging in inquiry-basedinstructional practices. Following the SWEPT study, other significant evaluations indicated thatteachers engaged in literature searches and reading about concepts related to the research in theirlaboratory, performed a variety of procedures, experienced and overcame frustration, appliedlogic and creative insight to analyzing their data, presented their research to peers
from the pilot IM course conversion volunteered to serve as peer mentors. These peermentors acted as team leaders for three learning teams during their weekly consultation meetingsto help reduce the teaching load of the TAs. These students volunteered because they had had apositive experience in the pilot course and they recognized an opportunity to learn teammanagement skills which they hoped would be helpful later in their careers as engineers. Weexpect that more students from the scaled IM course conversion will similarly wish to return aspeer mentors. If sufficient numbers of students volunteer as peer mentors, we could potentiallyeven lower the financial cost of the IM course conversion by reducing the number of TAsrequired to run the
interests include the educational climate for students in science and engineering, assets-based approaches to STEM equity, and gender and race stratification in education and the workforce.Dr. Cara Margherio, University of Washington Cara Margherio is a Senior Research Associate at the UW Center for Evaluation & Research for STEM Equity (CERSE). Cara serves as project manager for program evaluation on several NSF- and NIH-funded projects. Her research interests include community cultural wealth, counterspaces, peer mentoring, and institutional change.Kerice Doten-Snitker, University of Washington Ms. Doten-Snitker is a Graduate Research Assistant at the University of Washington’s Center for Eval- uation and